<?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>2019 (4) TMI 23 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377579</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the requirement of pre-deposit under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for filing appeals in service tax matters. It emphasized that inadmissible credits cannot be used to fulfill deposit obligations, ensuring compliance with statutory provisions. The Revenue&#039;s application was allowed, directing the appellants to comply with the pre-deposit requirements within thirty days from the order date.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2019 15:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=564997" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 23 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377579</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the requirement of pre-deposit under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for filing appeals in service tax matters. It emphasized that inadmissible credits cannot be used to fulfill deposit obligations, ensuring compliance with statutory provisions. The Revenue&#039;s application was allowed, directing the appellants to comply with the pre-deposit requirements within thirty days from the order date.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377579</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>