<?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 (11) TMI 200 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87621</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the demand for duty was time-barred as there was no suppression by the appellant. The appellant was found eligible for the benefit of Notification 37/86 based on the definitions of lint and cotton, supporting their classification under the notification. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed on both merit and limitation grounds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Sep 2011 12:24:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124687" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (11) TMI 200 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87621</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the demand for duty was time-barred as there was no suppression by the appellant. The appellant was found eligible for the benefit of Notification 37/86 based on the definitions of lint and cotton, supporting their classification under the notification. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed on both merit and limitation grounds.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87621</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>