<?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>2004 (3) TMI 305 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53388</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled that interest under Sec. 11AB is not chargeable for periods before the amendment without fraud/collusion/suppression of facts. As the duty in this case became payable before the amendment, interest levy was deemed inapplicable. The Tribunal set aside the interest levy, citing consistency with prior judgments and the specific circumstances of the case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Oct 2010 11:37:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91865" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (3) TMI 305 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53388</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled that interest under Sec. 11AB is not chargeable for periods before the amendment without fraud/collusion/suppression of facts. As the duty in this case became payable before the amendment, interest levy was deemed inapplicable. The Tribunal set aside the interest levy, citing consistency with prior judgments and the specific circumstances of the case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53388</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>