<?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>2008 (8) TMI 616 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124038</link>
    <description>Heading 48.01 covers newsprint in rolls or sheets, and Chapter Note 3 to Chapter 48 limits newsprint to paper intended for printing a newspaper. Paper cleared to organisations other than newspaper printers did not satisfy that test because it was not intended for newspaper printing. On that basis, the request to recall the ex parte final order was found to have no merit, and the recall application was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Sep 2012 17:53:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=160995" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 616 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124038</link>
      <description>Heading 48.01 covers newsprint in rolls or sheets, and Chapter Note 3 to Chapter 48 limits newsprint to paper intended for printing a newspaper. Paper cleared to organisations other than newspaper printers did not satisfy that test because it was not intended for newspaper printing. On that basis, the request to recall the ex parte final order was found to have no merit, and the recall application was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124038</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>