<?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 (6) TMI 105 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91488</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, holding that when faced with multiple exemption notifications, the assessee should benefit from the more advantageous one. However, due to the lack of clarity on the specific notifications applicable, the case was referred to the Hon&#039;ble Allahabad High Court for a legal opinion. The questions referred related to the duty payment options and entitlement to credit for duty paid on inputs for fully exempted products under Notification 217/86.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Oct 2011 13:03:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128550" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (6) TMI 105 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91488</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, holding that when faced with multiple exemption notifications, the assessee should benefit from the more advantageous one. However, due to the lack of clarity on the specific notifications applicable, the case was referred to the Hon&#039;ble Allahabad High Court for a legal opinion. The questions referred related to the duty payment options and entitlement to credit for duty paid on inputs for fully exempted products under Notification 217/86.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91488</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>