<?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>2007 (10) TMI 480 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122905</link>
    <description>The court allowed the appeal by way of remand, setting aside the earlier decision on the maintainability of the appeal. The judgment emphasized that the doctrine of merger should not be applied where the subject matter of the appeals is distinct. The matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a decision on the Revenue&#039;s appeal based on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Aug 2012 16:02:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=159886" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (10) TMI 480 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122905</link>
      <description>The court allowed the appeal by way of remand, setting aside the earlier decision on the maintainability of the appeal. The judgment emphasized that the doctrine of merger should not be applied where the subject matter of the appeals is distinct. The matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a decision on the Revenue&#039;s appeal based on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122905</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>