<?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>1991 (12) TMI 189 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94739</link>
    <description>The case focused on the determination of duty payment at the blended wool top stage versus the pure wool top stage. The Tribunal granted relief to the respondents based on the British India Corporation case, emphasizing the historical context of trade notices and Ministry of Finance advice. The Tribunal&#039;s interpretation of its previous order supported the respondents&#039; claim for refund. Despite the Department&#039;s challenge on the Tribunal&#039;s competency to grant relief, the decision stood. The Tribunal rejected the argument that prior duty payment barred the refund claim. The issue of limitation on the show cause notice was deemed unnecessary, leading to the dismissal of the appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Dec 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Dec 2011 14:39:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=131798" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (12) TMI 189 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94739</link>
      <description>The case focused on the determination of duty payment at the blended wool top stage versus the pure wool top stage. The Tribunal granted relief to the respondents based on the British India Corporation case, emphasizing the historical context of trade notices and Ministry of Finance advice. The Tribunal&#039;s interpretation of its previous order supported the respondents&#039; claim for refund. Despite the Department&#039;s challenge on the Tribunal&#039;s competency to grant relief, the decision stood. The Tribunal rejected the argument that prior duty payment barred the refund claim. The issue of limitation on the show cause notice was deemed unnecessary, leading to the dismissal of the appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Dec 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94739</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>