<?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>1996 (9) TMI 337 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85929</link>
    <description>Rule 233B permitted duty payment under protest where the protest letter stated the grounds of dispute; a separate detailed representation was unnecessary when the reasons were already set out. However, an approved classification list was an appealable order, and once that order was not challenged, the assessee could not continue to press the protest before the Assistant Collector. The proper remedy was to file the statutory appeal against the approval order. The protest was therefore ineffective where the appeal remedy against classification approval was not pursued, and the dismissal of the protest was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2011 11:14:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122996" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (9) TMI 337 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85929</link>
      <description>Rule 233B permitted duty payment under protest where the protest letter stated the grounds of dispute; a separate detailed representation was unnecessary when the reasons were already set out. However, an approved classification list was an appealable order, and once that order was not challenged, the assessee could not continue to press the protest before the Assistant Collector. The proper remedy was to file the statutory appeal against the approval order. The protest was therefore ineffective where the appeal remedy against classification approval was not pursued, and the dismissal of the protest was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85929</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>