<?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>2003 (10) TMI 496 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110533</link>
    <description>Goods manufactured before 31 August 1997 but cleared later were held outside Notification No. 57/97, because the clarification in paragraph 5 of the Ministry&#039;s letter dated 30 August 1997 applied to goods already manufactured before the notification commenced on 1 September 1997. The later notification could not be used to fasten duty liability on such goods. The appellant therefore succeeded and the duty demand was not sustainable under Notification No. 57/97.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 13:09:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=147549" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (10) TMI 496 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110533</link>
      <description>Goods manufactured before 31 August 1997 but cleared later were held outside Notification No. 57/97, because the clarification in paragraph 5 of the Ministry&#039;s letter dated 30 August 1997 applied to goods already manufactured before the notification commenced on 1 September 1997. The later notification could not be used to fasten duty liability on such goods. The appellant therefore succeeded and the duty demand was not sustainable under Notification No. 57/97.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110533</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>