<?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>1988 (11) TMI 222 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74136</link>
    <description>The Tribunal rectified a typographical error in the authorization and restored the appeal. It held that packing materials should not be included in the assessable value of sulphuric acid. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, finding no merit in their arguments regarding time-barred demands and the inclusion of packing materials in the assessable value.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 18:32:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=112415" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (11) TMI 222 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74136</link>
      <description>The Tribunal rectified a typographical error in the authorization and restored the appeal. It held that packing materials should not be included in the assessable value of sulphuric acid. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, finding no merit in their arguments regarding time-barred demands and the inclusion of packing materials in the assessable value.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74136</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>