<?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>1990 (6) TMI 176 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80800</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the reference application under Section 36G(1) of the Central Excises &amp;amp; Salt Act, 1944, as it related to the determination of the central excise duty rate, which is not eligible for a reference. Additionally, the Tribunal corrected the period for the demand of duty in line with the actual demand raised by the Department, emphasizing the importance of precise interpretation of legal provisions and accuracy in specifying the demand period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Jun 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 14:57:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=117945" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (6) TMI 176 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80800</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the reference application under Section 36G(1) of the Central Excises &amp;amp; Salt Act, 1944, as it related to the determination of the central excise duty rate, which is not eligible for a reference. Additionally, the Tribunal corrected the period for the demand of duty in line with the actual demand raised by the Department, emphasizing the importance of precise interpretation of legal provisions and accuracy in specifying the demand period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Jun 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80800</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>