<?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>1999 (3) TMI 140 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90013</link>
    <description>Rule 173H of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 allowed duty-paid goods to be retained in, or brought into, a factory or warehouse subject to specified conditions, and permitted removal without duty where those conditions were met. The rule did not prescribe any six-month limit for removal of such goods, so a demand based on an assumed time restriction could not be sustained. Penalty founded on the same premise also failed. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Oct 2011 18:00:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=127075" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (3) TMI 140 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90013</link>
      <description>Rule 173H of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 allowed duty-paid goods to be retained in, or brought into, a factory or warehouse subject to specified conditions, and permitted removal without duty where those conditions were met. The rule did not prescribe any six-month limit for removal of such goods, so a demand based on an assumed time restriction could not be sustained. Penalty founded on the same premise also failed. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90013</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>