<?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>2006 (1) TMI 444 - CESTAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118125</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal against the setting aside of duty demand and penalty. The case involved the import of Crude Palm Oil for manufacturing Vanaspati &amp;amp; Refined Oil, where a portion of the oil was not utilized for the intended purpose. The Tribunal found that the duty demand was not justified as the goods were not received by the respondent, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Jun 2012 16:20:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=155122" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (1) TMI 444 - CESTAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118125</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal against the setting aside of duty demand and penalty. The case involved the import of Crude Palm Oil for manufacturing Vanaspati &amp;amp; Refined Oil, where a portion of the oil was not utilized for the intended purpose. The Tribunal found that the duty demand was not justified as the goods were not received by the respondent, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118125</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>