<?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 236 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91365</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order that found the appellants had suppressed facts to evade excise duty. The Tribunal determined that the firms were separate entities and not dummy units, thus rejecting the clubbing of clearances and exemption eligibility. The matter was remanded for further consideration to evaluate the totality of facts, financial relationships, and operational control.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Oct 2011 15:21:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128427" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (3) TMI 236 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91365</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order that found the appellants had suppressed facts to evade excise duty. The Tribunal determined that the firms were separate entities and not dummy units, thus rejecting the clubbing of clearances and exemption eligibility. The matter was remanded for further consideration to evaluate the totality of facts, financial relationships, and operational control.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91365</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>