<?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 (8) TMI 755 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104403</link>
    <description>A rubber compound found identical to a latex mix already held exempt under Notification No. 115/75-C.E. was entitled to the same exemption, and the demand could not be sustained. The earlier Tribunal ruling on the identical product governed the present matter, so there was no basis to distinguish the case or order a fresh remand. The assessee therefore succeeded, and the duty demand and connected penalty were set aside with consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Feb 2012 18:52:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=141442" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (8) TMI 755 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104403</link>
      <description>A rubber compound found identical to a latex mix already held exempt under Notification No. 115/75-C.E. was entitled to the same exemption, and the demand could not be sustained. The earlier Tribunal ruling on the identical product governed the present matter, so there was no basis to distinguish the case or order a fresh remand. The assessee therefore succeeded, and the duty demand and connected penalty were set aside with consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104403</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>