<?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>1985 (3) TMI 287 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167486</link>
    <description>The tribunal concluded that the evidence presented was insufficient to classify the goods as &quot;furnishing fabrics,&quot; setting aside the classification, duty demands, and penalties imposed. All ten appeals were allowed, with consequential relief granted. The tribunal&#039;s decision also affected the Order-in-Appeal of the Central Board of Excise and Customs, which had relied on the Collector&#039;s order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2014 12:01:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=371855" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (3) TMI 287 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167486</link>
      <description>The tribunal concluded that the evidence presented was insufficient to classify the goods as &quot;furnishing fabrics,&quot; setting aside the classification, duty demands, and penalties imposed. All ten appeals were allowed, with consequential relief granted. The tribunal&#039;s decision also affected the Order-in-Appeal of the Central Board of Excise and Customs, which had relied on the Collector&#039;s order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167486</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>