<?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>1987 (5) TMI 353 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73134</link>
    <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal in favor of the appellants, setting aside the lower authority&#039;s orders. It found that the excess molasses was primarily water mixed with the product, rendering the duty demand and penalty unjustified. Additionally, the tribunal held that the duty demand was barred by limitation. The judgment emphasized the lack of justification for the duty demand and penalty, supporting the appellants&#039; position.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 May 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 May 2011 12:49:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=111413" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (5) TMI 353 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73134</link>
      <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal in favor of the appellants, setting aside the lower authority&#039;s orders. It found that the excess molasses was primarily water mixed with the product, rendering the duty demand and penalty unjustified. Additionally, the tribunal held that the duty demand was barred by limitation. The judgment emphasized the lack of justification for the duty demand and penalty, supporting the appellants&#039; position.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 May 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73134</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>