<?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>2011 (10) TMI 100 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206980</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed as the Tribunal found that the appellant complied with the statutory conditions under Rule 16(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, regarding the movement of goods. The judgment emphasized the importance of maintaining proper records of goods movement and clarified that the absence of specific difficulties expressed under Rule 16(3) resulted in the disposal of the appeal in favor of the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2016 11:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=180462" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (10) TMI 100 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206980</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed as the Tribunal found that the appellant complied with the statutory conditions under Rule 16(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, regarding the movement of goods. The judgment emphasized the importance of maintaining proper records of goods movement and clarified that the absence of specific difficulties expressed under Rule 16(3) resulted in the disposal of the appeal in favor of the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206980</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>