Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2006 (1) TMI 54

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t respondent from collecting the recovery of arrears, Central Excise Duty, vide communication dated 24-11-2005 in C. No. IV/16/109/05 by the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise dated 24-11-2005 confirmed vide order of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (South Zonal Bench) in Final Order No. 825/05 dated 9-6-2005 [2005 (186) E.L.T. 410 (T.)]. 2. Admittedly, the Customs, Exci....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and notice dated 31-10-2005. The main contention of the petitioner is that since the application filed by the petitioner to set aside the order passed by the Tribunal is pending before the Tribunal, the first respondent should not have issued the demand notice. Such a contention is untenable. There is an order fixing the liability on the petitioner to pay the duty and when there is admittedly no s....