<?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 (11) TMI 177 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92624</link>
    <description>Identical facts involving the same assessee were governed by an earlier High Court direction requiring reference of questions of law in a connected matter. The Tribunal aligned the reframed questions in this application with those already directed to be referred, treating the controversy as covered by that prior order. The Revenue&#039;s reference application was therefore allowed and the questions of law were referred to the High Court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2011 18:50:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129685" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (11) TMI 177 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92624</link>
      <description>Identical facts involving the same assessee were governed by an earlier High Court direction requiring reference of questions of law in a connected matter. The Tribunal aligned the reframed questions in this application with those already directed to be referred, treating the controversy as covered by that prior order. The Revenue&#039;s reference application was therefore allowed and the questions of law were referred to the High Court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92624</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>