<?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 (5) TMI 503 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114311</link>
    <description>Fabricated steel structural items were found to have been manufactured in the factory and then moved to site, so the premise that they were site-manufactured and exempt from duty could not be sustained. The appellate order was therefore set aside. However, objections on duty liability, including classification and limitation, required fresh examination by the adjudicating authority. The matter was remanded for reconsideration on merits after following natural justice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 16:39:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151310" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (5) TMI 503 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114311</link>
      <description>Fabricated steel structural items were found to have been manufactured in the factory and then moved to site, so the premise that they were site-manufactured and exempt from duty could not be sustained. The appellate order was therefore set aside. However, objections on duty liability, including classification and limitation, required fresh examination by the adjudicating authority. The matter was remanded for reconsideration on merits after following natural justice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114311</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>