<?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 (8) TMI 280 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88960</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order confirming the demand and penalty on the assessees. However, no decision was made regarding the penalties imposed on individual directors. The Tribunal found that the clearances of the soap unit should not be combined with the shoe unit&#039;s clearances for duty calculation, deeming the demand for differential duty unjustified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Sep 2011 15:18:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126023" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (8) TMI 280 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88960</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order confirming the demand and penalty on the assessees. However, no decision was made regarding the penalties imposed on individual directors. The Tribunal found that the clearances of the soap unit should not be combined with the shoe unit&#039;s clearances for duty calculation, deeming the demand for differential duty unjustified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88960</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>