<?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 (12) TMI 285 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166794</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the lower authority&#039;s decision that the &quot;GAS-O-FIRE&quot; Flint Lighters were classifiable under Tariff Item No. 39, justified the demand for duty under Rule 9(2), and deemed the imposition of penalties under Rules 52A and 226 appropriate. The appellant&#039;s arguments regarding market perception and bona fide belief were dismissed, emphasizing compliance with Central Excise Rules. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the duty liability and penalties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Dec 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:08:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=368186" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (12) TMI 285 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166794</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the lower authority&#039;s decision that the &quot;GAS-O-FIRE&quot; Flint Lighters were classifiable under Tariff Item No. 39, justified the demand for duty under Rule 9(2), and deemed the imposition of penalties under Rules 52A and 226 appropriate. The appellant&#039;s arguments regarding market perception and bona fide belief were dismissed, emphasizing compliance with Central Excise Rules. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the duty liability and penalties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Dec 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166794</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>