<?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 (8) TMI 969 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102874</link>
    <description>Dross and skimmings arising in the manufacture of aluminium rods were considered not liable to duty under Tariff Item 68. The Tribunal treated the dispute as governed by earlier coordinate and presidential reference orders, which had already concluded that such by-products did not attract duty under that item. No separate basis was found to depart from the settled line of authority, so the departmental appeal failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 16:24:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139920" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (8) TMI 969 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102874</link>
      <description>Dross and skimmings arising in the manufacture of aluminium rods were considered not liable to duty under Tariff Item 68. The Tribunal treated the dispute as governed by earlier coordinate and presidential reference orders, which had already concluded that such by-products did not attract duty under that item. No separate basis was found to depart from the settled line of authority, so the departmental appeal failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102874</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>