<?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 (8) TMI 515 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116674</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai held that copper rods manufactured from copper bars were entitled to Notification No. 199/66. Despite prior demand confirmation, the Tribunal ruled that the benefit of the notification should not be denied, citing a precedent where similar products were exempt from excise duty. The Tribunal emphasized equal treatment of assessees and the importance of interpreting notifications to provide relief to appellants. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, granting consequential relief to the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Jun 2012 17:01:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153672" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (8) TMI 515 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116674</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai held that copper rods manufactured from copper bars were entitled to Notification No. 199/66. Despite prior demand confirmation, the Tribunal ruled that the benefit of the notification should not be denied, citing a precedent where similar products were exempt from excise duty. The Tribunal emphasized equal treatment of assessees and the importance of interpreting notifications to provide relief to appellants. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, granting consequential relief to the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116674</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>