<?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>2018 (8) TMI 2183 - CESTAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470635</link>
    <description>Mandatory pre-deposit compliance requires verification where payment corresponding to the prescribed duty percentage is made under an incorrect assessee code. The notes state that the payment was not firmly disputed and that the coding discrepancy had been notified to the department. Dismissal of the appeal without verifying the claimed payment was therefore unsustainable. The matter was returned for verification of the pre-deposit and fresh adjudication, favouring the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2026 10:54:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=914996" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 2183 - CESTAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470635</link>
      <description>Mandatory pre-deposit compliance requires verification where payment corresponding to the prescribed duty percentage is made under an incorrect assessee code. The notes state that the payment was not firmly disputed and that the coding discrepancy had been notified to the department. Dismissal of the appeal without verifying the claimed payment was therefore unsustainable. The matter was returned for verification of the pre-deposit and fresh adjudication, favouring the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470635</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>