<?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>2017 (1) TMI 1226 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338146</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order in both issues and providing relief to the appellant. The Tribunal held that coercive action cannot be taken when an appeal is pending before a higher judicial forum, and refunds cannot be adjusted against arrears of revenue when the matter in dispute is unresolved. The Tribunal also found that recovery action for interest during the pendency of an appeal before the Tribunal was improper.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2017 08:57:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=456496" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 1226 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338146</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order in both issues and providing relief to the appellant. The Tribunal held that coercive action cannot be taken when an appeal is pending before a higher judicial forum, and refunds cannot be adjusted against arrears of revenue when the matter in dispute is unresolved. The Tribunal also found that recovery action for interest during the pendency of an appeal before the Tribunal was improper.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338146</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>