<?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>1986 (9) TMI 91 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42199</link>
    <description>The writ petitions were dismissed as governed by the earlier ruling in Union of India v. Modi Rubber Ltd., with the court granting time for payment of the balance excise duty arrears and permitting encashment of the bank guarantee against 50% of the arrears. The disposition turned on the prior precedent, and the practical effect was to require payment of the remaining dues while allowing partial recovery through the security furnished.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2016 16:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=80728" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (9) TMI 91 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42199</link>
      <description>The writ petitions were dismissed as governed by the earlier ruling in Union of India v. Modi Rubber Ltd., with the court granting time for payment of the balance excise duty arrears and permitting encashment of the bank guarantee against 50% of the arrears. The disposition turned on the prior precedent, and the practical effect was to require payment of the remaining dues while allowing partial recovery through the security furnished.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42199</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>