<?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>2001 (9) TMI 208 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50935</link>
    <description>Abatement of duty could not be adjusted against an alleged demand where no show cause notice was shown to have been served and the demand had not attained finality. Because the underlying demand order was still pending in appeal, the proposed set-off lacked legal support. The adjustment portion of the order was therefore set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Sep 2010 16:38:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89414" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (9) TMI 208 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50935</link>
      <description>Abatement of duty could not be adjusted against an alleged demand where no show cause notice was shown to have been served and the demand had not attained finality. Because the underlying demand order was still pending in appeal, the proposed set-off lacked legal support. The adjustment portion of the order was therefore set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50935</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>