<?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>1994 (5) TMI 106 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83316</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Collector (Appeals) decision rejecting the appeal on the classification of RFL Solution under Central Excise duty. The appeal was deemed not maintainable as the Assistant Collector&#039;s decision favored the appellants, and the new grounds raised were not considered relevant to the classification dispute. The Tribunal emphasized the need for adverse effects on the appellant&#039;s interests for an appeal to be maintainable, citing legal precedents. The excisability question was not addressed as the focus was on the appeal&#039;s maintainability, resulting in the rejection of the appeal and disposal of the cross-objection.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2011 16:41:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=120461" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (5) TMI 106 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83316</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Collector (Appeals) decision rejecting the appeal on the classification of RFL Solution under Central Excise duty. The appeal was deemed not maintainable as the Assistant Collector&#039;s decision favored the appellants, and the new grounds raised were not considered relevant to the classification dispute. The Tribunal emphasized the need for adverse effects on the appellant&#039;s interests for an appeal to be maintainable, citing legal precedents. The excisability question was not addressed as the focus was on the appeal&#039;s maintainability, resulting in the rejection of the appeal and disposal of the cross-objection.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83316</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>