<?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 (6) TMI 48 - Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=884</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants regarding the eligibility of excise duty on scrap items, citing precedents set by the Apex Court and the Tribunal. The Tribunal considered scrap items not dutiable as no manufacturing process occurs, contrary to the Revenue&#039;s demand for duty. The impugned order was deemed not legal and proper, leading to its set aside, and the appeals along with stay applications were allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 18:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40316" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (6) TMI 48 - Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=884</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants regarding the eligibility of excise duty on scrap items, citing precedents set by the Apex Court and the Tribunal. The Tribunal considered scrap items not dutiable as no manufacturing process occurs, contrary to the Revenue&#039;s demand for duty. The impugned order was deemed not legal and proper, leading to its set aside, and the appeals along with stay applications were allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=884</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>