<?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>2001 (4) TMI 327 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96136</link>
    <description>A rectification application was allowed because the earlier Final Order dealt with dutiability of special brazed carbide tipped tools, while the actual dispute concerned duty on unground, duty-paid tool tips after subsequent grinding and clearance. The Tribunal treated this mismatch as an apparent error on the face of the record, recalled Final Order No. 306/2000-B, and directed the appeal to be re-listed for hearing on the correct issue of dutiability of tool tips.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2011 15:20:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=133195" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (4) TMI 327 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96136</link>
      <description>A rectification application was allowed because the earlier Final Order dealt with dutiability of special brazed carbide tipped tools, while the actual dispute concerned duty on unground, duty-paid tool tips after subsequent grinding and clearance. The Tribunal treated this mismatch as an apparent error on the face of the record, recalled Final Order No. 306/2000-B, and directed the appeal to be re-listed for hearing on the correct issue of dutiability of tool tips.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96136</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>