<?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>2002 (2) TMI 1071 - CEGAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104737</link>
    <description>Section 35G did not permit a reference where the proposed questions related to valuation of goods or any question having a bearing on the rate of duty for assessment purposes. The Tribunal applied its settled view that such matters fall outside reference jurisdiction under that provision. On that basis, it held the reference application to be not maintainable and rejected it, declining to send the questions to the High Court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2012 11:32:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=141776" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (2) TMI 1071 - CEGAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104737</link>
      <description>Section 35G did not permit a reference where the proposed questions related to valuation of goods or any question having a bearing on the rate of duty for assessment purposes. The Tribunal applied its settled view that such matters fall outside reference jurisdiction under that provision. On that basis, it held the reference application to be not maintainable and rejected it, declining to send the questions to the High Court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104737</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>