<?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>1994 (3) TMI 105 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43809</link>
    <description>Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 does not suspend the levy or collection of central excise duty on removal of excisable goods by a sick industrial company. Excise duty remains payable under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and the relevant Rules at the stage of removal, because that liability forms part of the sale transaction and is not equivalent to proceedings for winding up, execution, distress, or similar coercive action against property. The provision therefore offers no protection against insistence on duty payment before removal of goods, and the demand for excise duty remains enforceable during rehabilitation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Jun 2010 12:22:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=82338" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (3) TMI 105 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43809</link>
      <description>Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 does not suspend the levy or collection of central excise duty on removal of excisable goods by a sick industrial company. Excise duty remains payable under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and the relevant Rules at the stage of removal, because that liability forms part of the sale transaction and is not equivalent to proceedings for winding up, execution, distress, or similar coercive action against property. The provision therefore offers no protection against insistence on duty payment before removal of goods, and the demand for excise duty remains enforceable during rehabilitation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43809</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>