<?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 (1) TMI 791 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207069</link>
    <description>The Tribunal recalled the stay order based on incorrect grounds, as the relief granted was not related to education cess or higher education cess. The decision was influenced by a misrepresentation by the Departmental Representative, leading to an erroneous outcome. The case underscores the importance of accurate and substantiated representations in legal proceedings, emphasizing the necessity of basing decisions on actual issues and factual evidence, while adhering to relevant legal provisions and precedents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 17:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=180550" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (1) TMI 791 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207069</link>
      <description>The Tribunal recalled the stay order based on incorrect grounds, as the relief granted was not related to education cess or higher education cess. The decision was influenced by a misrepresentation by the Departmental Representative, leading to an erroneous outcome. The case underscores the importance of accurate and substantiated representations in legal proceedings, emphasizing the necessity of basing decisions on actual issues and factual evidence, while adhering to relevant legal provisions and precedents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207069</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>