<?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 (11) TMI 445 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115151</link>
    <description>The concessional duty benefit under Notification No. 9/2000-C.E. was conditional on the assessee exercising a written option for exemption. A classification declaration filed under Rule 173B expressly stated the intention to avail the notification and specifically mentioned it, which satisfied the prescribed written option requirement. The benefit of the notification was therefore available, and denial of the exemption was not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 12:48:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152150" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (11) TMI 445 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115151</link>
      <description>The concessional duty benefit under Notification No. 9/2000-C.E. was conditional on the assessee exercising a written option for exemption. A classification declaration filed under Rule 173B expressly stated the intention to avail the notification and specifically mentioned it, which satisfied the prescribed written option requirement. The benefit of the notification was therefore available, and denial of the exemption was not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115151</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>