<?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 502 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116475</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-I lacked jurisdiction to issue a show cause notice to M/s. FEIL. The demand of duty from M/s. MIE and M/s. FEIL was deemed unsustainable due to the absence of separate identification of clearances and inadequate evidence. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order and ruled in favor of the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Jun 2012 17:57:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153473" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (7) TMI 502 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116475</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-I lacked jurisdiction to issue a show cause notice to M/s. FEIL. The demand of duty from M/s. MIE and M/s. FEIL was deemed unsustainable due to the absence of separate identification of clearances and inadequate evidence. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order and ruled in favor of the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116475</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>