<?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 (12) TMI 446 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110781</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals by remanding the case for a fresh adjudication, emphasizing the significance of clarity and opportunity for the appellant to address the costing issues raised by the Commissioner. The lack of specific details in the notice regarding costing led to the decision to provide the appellant with a chance to explain before any duty demands are confirmed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2012 15:57:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=147797" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (12) TMI 446 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110781</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals by remanding the case for a fresh adjudication, emphasizing the significance of clarity and opportunity for the appellant to address the costing issues raised by the Commissioner. The lack of specific details in the notice regarding costing led to the decision to provide the appellant with a chance to explain before any duty demands are confirmed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110781</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>