<?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>2014 (4) TMI 2 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245503</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal allowed the condonation of a two-day delay in filing the appeal. Two stay petitions concerning duty demands were disposed of together, with variations in the periods for which the demands were confirmed. The Tribunal upheld the inclusion of freight expenses in the assessable value for FOR sales, directing the appellant to make a specific deposit within a given timeframe. The judgment provided detailed reasoning for these decisions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2014 15:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=350582" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (4) TMI 2 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245503</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal allowed the condonation of a two-day delay in filing the appeal. Two stay petitions concerning duty demands were disposed of together, with variations in the periods for which the demands were confirmed. The Tribunal upheld the inclusion of freight expenses in the assessable value for FOR sales, directing the appellant to make a specific deposit within a given timeframe. The judgment provided detailed reasoning for these decisions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245503</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>