<?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>2016 (1) TMI 841 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271049</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, remanding the case for a fresh determination of Annual Capacity Production (ACP) under the compounded levy scheme. The decision emphasized the importance of applying the correct formula as per the amended notification to avoid erroneous duty demands. Previous Tribunal orders and a High Court decision supported revisiting ACP calculations in similar cases, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order and directing the Commissioner to re-fix the ACP based on the revised values.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:04:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=414115" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (1) TMI 841 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271049</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, remanding the case for a fresh determination of Annual Capacity Production (ACP) under the compounded levy scheme. The decision emphasized the importance of applying the correct formula as per the amended notification to avoid erroneous duty demands. Previous Tribunal orders and a High Court decision supported revisiting ACP calculations in similar cases, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order and directing the Commissioner to re-fix the ACP based on the revised values.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271049</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>