<?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 537 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113252</link>
    <description>A rectification request sought recall or modification of a final order on the basis that no excise duty was payable on vehicles brought back for repair and re-exported. The tribunal did not grant substantive relief in the application, but permitted the applicant to pursue benefit under Rule 173M of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 before the proper authority, which was to decide the matter in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 May 2012 15:26:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150268" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (12) TMI 537 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113252</link>
      <description>A rectification request sought recall or modification of a final order on the basis that no excise duty was payable on vehicles brought back for repair and re-exported. The tribunal did not grant substantive relief in the application, but permitted the applicant to pursue benefit under Rule 173M of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 before the proper authority, which was to decide the matter in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113252</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>