<?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 (9) TMI 1422 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348665</link>
    <description>The appellate court clarified that the mandatory deposit under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, could be made from the CENVAT Credit Account if permissible under Rule 3(4) of the CENVAT Credit Rules. The First Appellate Authority&#039;s decision, which insisted on cash payment, was overturned. The case was remanded for a fresh decision without requiring any additional pre-deposit, allowing both parties to present evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Sep 2017 09:11:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=490746" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 1422 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348665</link>
      <description>The appellate court clarified that the mandatory deposit under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, could be made from the CENVAT Credit Account if permissible under Rule 3(4) of the CENVAT Credit Rules. The First Appellate Authority&#039;s decision, which insisted on cash payment, was overturned. The case was remanded for a fresh decision without requiring any additional pre-deposit, allowing both parties to present evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348665</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>