<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2012 (6) TMI 857 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188110</link>
    <description>The court set aside the appellate order requiring the petitioner to deposit 50% of the Cenvat credit amount and penalty, ruling that further payment would amount to double payment. The court dispensed with the pre-deposit requirement, directing the appellate authority to hear the appeal within two months. The writ petition was allowed without costs, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing and examining the petitioner&#039;s entitlement to Cenvat credit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2016 13:20:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=448357" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (6) TMI 857 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188110</link>
      <description>The court set aside the appellate order requiring the petitioner to deposit 50% of the Cenvat credit amount and penalty, ruling that further payment would amount to double payment. The court dispensed with the pre-deposit requirement, directing the appellate authority to hear the appeal within two months. The writ petition was allowed without costs, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing and examining the petitioner&#039;s entitlement to Cenvat credit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188110</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>