<?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>2003 (9) TMI 766 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171363</link>
    <description>The Tribunal overturned the Order-in-Appeal, ruling in favor of the Appellants. It found the denial of SSI exemption under Notification No. 1/93-CE to be legally unfounded due to insufficient evidence and acknowledged the Proprietor&#039;s legal ownership of the brand name &quot;ELEX.&quot; Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, granting any consequential relief as per the law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Jul 2024 12:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=390614" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (9) TMI 766 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171363</link>
      <description>The Tribunal overturned the Order-in-Appeal, ruling in favor of the Appellants. It found the denial of SSI exemption under Notification No. 1/93-CE to be legally unfounded due to insufficient evidence and acknowledged the Proprietor&#039;s legal ownership of the brand name &quot;ELEX.&quot; Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, granting any consequential relief as per the law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171363</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>