<?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 564 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113708</link>
    <description>An assessee that elects to pay duty at the normal rate at the start of a financial year cannot switch to the concessional rate under Notification No. 1/93 during that same year. The proviso to Para 4 was read as barring reversion once the option for the normal rate is exercised, and the governing condition was treated as applying for the full financial year. The lower authority&#039;s interpretation was found consistent with the notification, and the demand was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 May 2012 18:13:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150714" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (10) TMI 564 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113708</link>
      <description>An assessee that elects to pay duty at the normal rate at the start of a financial year cannot switch to the concessional rate under Notification No. 1/93 during that same year. The proviso to Para 4 was read as barring reversion once the option for the normal rate is exercised, and the governing condition was treated as applying for the full financial year. The lower authority&#039;s interpretation was found consistent with the notification, and the demand was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113708</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>