<?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>1997 (4) TMI 176 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86772</link>
    <description>Sodium hypochlorite was treated as falling within the expression &quot;bleach liquor&quot; in Notification No. 195/86, because the Tribunal followed its earlier final ruling in Century Textiles construing the notification that way. On that interpretation, the exemption was admissible and there was no reason to refer the matter to a larger Bench. The departmental appeal therefore failed and was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Aug 2011 13:27:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=123839" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (4) TMI 176 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86772</link>
      <description>Sodium hypochlorite was treated as falling within the expression &quot;bleach liquor&quot; in Notification No. 195/86, because the Tribunal followed its earlier final ruling in Century Textiles construing the notification that way. On that interpretation, the exemption was admissible and there was no reason to refer the matter to a larger Bench. The departmental appeal therefore failed and was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86772</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>