<?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 (2) TMI 13 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271308</link>
    <description>Negligible tax effect led to dismissal of the appeal on that ground alone, without examination of the underlying merits. The order reflects the procedural principle that where the revenue impact is minimal, the appeal may be dismissed solely for want of sufficient tax effect. No substantive central excise issue was decided in the text supplied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2016 22:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=415039" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 13 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271308</link>
      <description>Negligible tax effect led to dismissal of the appeal on that ground alone, without examination of the underlying merits. The order reflects the procedural principle that where the revenue impact is minimal, the appeal may be dismissed solely for want of sufficient tax effect. No substantive central excise issue was decided in the text supplied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271308</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>