<?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 (10) TMI 120 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264845</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, recognizing a burning loss percentage of 5.8% during the manufacturing process and rejecting allegations of clandestine removal of goods. The decision overturned the previous order, granting relief to the appellant based on the acceptance of the burning loss claim and the finding that the extended period of limitation was inapplicable due to the Revenue&#039;s failure to address burning loss queries adequately.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 04 Oct 2015 12:33:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=399729" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (10) TMI 120 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264845</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, recognizing a burning loss percentage of 5.8% during the manufacturing process and rejecting allegations of clandestine removal of goods. The decision overturned the previous order, granting relief to the appellant based on the acceptance of the burning loss claim and the finding that the extended period of limitation was inapplicable due to the Revenue&#039;s failure to address burning loss queries adequately.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264845</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>