<?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>1986 (6) TMI 123 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72367</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand for duty and penalty related to it. They classified the finished tarpaulin as cotton fabric under Item 19 of the Central Excise Tariff, aligning with decisions of the Gujarat and Bombay High Courts. The appropriation of security amounts towards the seized goods&#039; value was also revoked.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 May 2011 18:05:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=110646" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (6) TMI 123 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72367</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand for duty and penalty related to it. They classified the finished tarpaulin as cotton fabric under Item 19 of the Central Excise Tariff, aligning with decisions of the Gujarat and Bombay High Courts. The appropriation of security amounts towards the seized goods&#039; value was also revoked.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72367</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>