<?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>2006 (9) TMI 5 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=686</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court partially allowed the appeals, overturning the Tribunal&#039;s decision and instructing a fresh review of the case. The parties were directed to bear their respective costs, and the Tribunal was tasked with determining whether the soft cotton waste was indeed a manufactured product liable for duty, based on a comprehensive analysis of legal principles and precedents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 16:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40131" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (9) TMI 5 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=686</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court partially allowed the appeals, overturning the Tribunal&#039;s decision and instructing a fresh review of the case. The parties were directed to bear their respective costs, and the Tribunal was tasked with determining whether the soft cotton waste was indeed a manufactured product liable for duty, based on a comprehensive analysis of legal principles and precedents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=686</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>