<?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>1983 (7) TMI 326 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166661</link>
    <description>Notification No. 146/74-C.E. was construed to allow rebate on excess production, not merely on a percentage of average production. The Tribunal followed its earlier rulings on the same question and noted that the interpretation favouring rebate on excess production had also been accepted in prior High Court decisions. On that basis, the assessee&#039;s claim was held to fall within the notification, and the benefit of rebate was directed to be granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jul 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2014 11:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=367700" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (7) TMI 326 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166661</link>
      <description>Notification No. 146/74-C.E. was construed to allow rebate on excess production, not merely on a percentage of average production. The Tribunal followed its earlier rulings on the same question and noted that the interpretation favouring rebate on excess production had also been accepted in prior High Court decisions. On that basis, the assessee&#039;s claim was held to fall within the notification, and the benefit of rebate was directed to be granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jul 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166661</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>