<?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>2004 (8) TMI 447 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112463</link>
    <description>The Tribunal remanded the case to the Commissioner for a decision on the manufacturer of the barge &quot;AF-BP-ROSE&quot; and a fresh consideration of the penalty aspect. Despite upholding duty liability on the barge, the Tribunal emphasized the need to determine the manufacturer for duty payment. The case was disposed of with directions for the Commissioner to resolve the outstanding issues regarding liability determination and penalty reassessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2012 11:49:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=149479" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (8) TMI 447 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112463</link>
      <description>The Tribunal remanded the case to the Commissioner for a decision on the manufacturer of the barge &quot;AF-BP-ROSE&quot; and a fresh consideration of the penalty aspect. Despite upholding duty liability on the barge, the Tribunal emphasized the need to determine the manufacturer for duty payment. The case was disposed of with directions for the Commissioner to resolve the outstanding issues regarding liability determination and penalty reassessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112463</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>