<?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>2015 (7) TMI 461 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261500</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant regarding the classification of Linear Alkyl Benzene Feed Stock (LABFS) and Low Aluminum Rolling Oil (LARO) under CETH 2710.29. However, the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 75/84-CE was denied, affirming that only Kerosene distributed through the Public Distribution System (PDS) qualifies for the exemption. The appeals were rejected concerning the exemption but allowed concerning the classification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2016 15:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=390183" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (7) TMI 461 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261500</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant regarding the classification of Linear Alkyl Benzene Feed Stock (LABFS) and Low Aluminum Rolling Oil (LARO) under CETH 2710.29. However, the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 75/84-CE was denied, affirming that only Kerosene distributed through the Public Distribution System (PDS) qualifies for the exemption. The appeals were rejected concerning the exemption but allowed concerning the classification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261500</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>