<?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>2005 (7) TMI 401 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115561</link>
    <description>DTA clearances by a 100% EOU were treated as governed by the Board&#039;s circular and the corresponding notification, and the dispute was already covered by a Larger Bench ruling supporting the appellant&#039;s method of duty payment. The appellate authority was bound to apply that Larger Bench decision, and ignoring it after noticing it was described as judicial indiscipline. On that basis, the demand was held unsustainable and the appeal was allowed in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 May 2012 10:14:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152560" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (7) TMI 401 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115561</link>
      <description>DTA clearances by a 100% EOU were treated as governed by the Board&#039;s circular and the corresponding notification, and the dispute was already covered by a Larger Bench ruling supporting the appellant&#039;s method of duty payment. The appellate authority was bound to apply that Larger Bench decision, and ignoring it after noticing it was described as judicial indiscipline. On that basis, the demand was held unsustainable and the appeal was allowed in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115561</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>