<?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>1998 (1) TMI 181 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88137</link>
    <description>An excise adjudication cannot travel beyond the grounds stated in the show cause notice, and an appellate challenge cannot succeed on a new basis outside the original notice and order-in-original. Here, the appeal memorandum did not raise relationship or the applicability of proviso (iii) to Section 4(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944; the only plea was that additional consideration flowed from buyer to manufacturer. The record showed that the notice and original adjudication were founded solely on alleged relationship between the parties, and the new ground was not shown to have been raised before the Collector (Appeals). The appeal was dismissed for lack of merit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2011 13:09:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=125203" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (1) TMI 181 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88137</link>
      <description>An excise adjudication cannot travel beyond the grounds stated in the show cause notice, and an appellate challenge cannot succeed on a new basis outside the original notice and order-in-original. Here, the appeal memorandum did not raise relationship or the applicability of proviso (iii) to Section 4(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944; the only plea was that additional consideration flowed from buyer to manufacturer. The record showed that the notice and original adjudication were founded solely on alleged relationship between the parties, and the new ground was not shown to have been raised before the Collector (Appeals). The appeal was dismissed for lack of merit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88137</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>