<?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 (3) TMI 1082 - CESTAT, AHEMDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209064</link>
    <description>A 100% export-oriented unit was not liable to pay education cess again on domestic tariff area clearances where the issue had already been decided in its favour by an earlier Tribunal ruling and followed in its own case. Mere filing of an appeal against that precedent did not justify ignoring it, because no stay or reversal had been shown. The Tribunal therefore held that the existing precedent remained binding and no contrary ground survived in the Revenue&#039;s challenge.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Jul 2013 16:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=182517" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 1082 - CESTAT, AHEMDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209064</link>
      <description>A 100% export-oriented unit was not liable to pay education cess again on domestic tariff area clearances where the issue had already been decided in its favour by an earlier Tribunal ruling and followed in its own case. Mere filing of an appeal against that precedent did not justify ignoring it, because no stay or reversal had been shown. The Tribunal therefore held that the existing precedent remained binding and no contrary ground survived in the Revenue&#039;s challenge.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209064</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>