<?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 (9) TMI 741 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251715</link>
    <description>The Tribunal determined that the appellants were job-workers, not manufacturers, and thus not liable for excise duty under Notification No. 6/2006-CE. The appellants were found to meet the exemption conditions, and the Commissioner misinterpreted procedural requirements. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the orders imposing duty, interest, and penalties, granting the appellants relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2015 13:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=365781" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (9) TMI 741 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251715</link>
      <description>The Tribunal determined that the appellants were job-workers, not manufacturers, and thus not liable for excise duty under Notification No. 6/2006-CE. The appellants were found to meet the exemption conditions, and the Commissioner misinterpreted procedural requirements. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the orders imposing duty, interest, and penalties, granting the appellants relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251715</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>