<?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 (12) TMI 326 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88103</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal determined that the coated lacquered foil was not excisable and, therefore, not dutiable. The respondent, a manufacturer of aluminium caps, was entitled to a full refund of the duty paid on the foil. However, the refund would be limited to the duty from the PLA account if proforma credit on plain aluminium foil was availed. This decision aimed to ensure the accurate calculation and allocation of the refund amount based on the circumstances of the case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2011 10:58:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=125169" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (12) TMI 326 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88103</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal determined that the coated lacquered foil was not excisable and, therefore, not dutiable. The respondent, a manufacturer of aluminium caps, was entitled to a full refund of the duty paid on the foil. However, the refund would be limited to the duty from the PLA account if proforma credit on plain aluminium foil was availed. This decision aimed to ensure the accurate calculation and allocation of the refund amount based on the circumstances of the case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88103</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>