<?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>2012 (12) TMI 426 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219411</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that zinc dross and ash were deemed marketable and excisable under the Central Excise Act, despite the Appellant&#039;s arguments to the contrary. While duty was chargeable, penalties were deemed unjustified. The Tribunal directed the Adjudicating Authority to quantify duty demands only for the normal limitation period, setting aside demands beyond that period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2012 17:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=192781" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (12) TMI 426 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219411</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that zinc dross and ash were deemed marketable and excisable under the Central Excise Act, despite the Appellant&#039;s arguments to the contrary. While duty was chargeable, penalties were deemed unjustified. The Tribunal directed the Adjudicating Authority to quantify duty demands only for the normal limitation period, setting aside demands beyond that period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219411</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>