<?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 510 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114456</link>
    <description>Duty-free export under the notification remained available where exports were made within six months or within a validly extended period allowed by the Collector of Central Excise. The record showed that such extension had in fact been granted, and proof of export had been furnished in all the cases covered by the proceeding. Once the extended statutory condition was satisfied, the demand for excise duty could not be sustained, and the Revenue&#039;s appeal failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 17:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151455" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (5) TMI 510 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114456</link>
      <description>Duty-free export under the notification remained available where exports were made within six months or within a validly extended period allowed by the Collector of Central Excise. The record showed that such extension had in fact been granted, and proof of export had been furnished in all the cases covered by the proceeding. Once the extended statutory condition was satisfied, the demand for excise duty could not be sustained, and the Revenue&#039;s appeal failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114456</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>