<?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 465 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219450</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeals regarding refund claims for Additional Excise Duty (AED) on High-Speed Diesel (HSD) under specific exemption notifications, ruling that AED on HSD was not covered by Notification No. 22/2003-C.E. and predecessors. The Tribunal emphasized that the exemptions did not extend to AED on HSD, as it was not explicitly mentioned, leading to the rejection of the refund claims totaling Rs. 1,12,28,400.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Oct 2012 11:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=192820" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (12) TMI 465 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219450</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeals regarding refund claims for Additional Excise Duty (AED) on High-Speed Diesel (HSD) under specific exemption notifications, ruling that AED on HSD was not covered by Notification No. 22/2003-C.E. and predecessors. The Tribunal emphasized that the exemptions did not extend to AED on HSD, as it was not explicitly mentioned, leading to the rejection of the refund claims totaling Rs. 1,12,28,400.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219450</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>