<?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 (6) TMI 916 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329207</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that sugar syrup manufactured as an intermediary product during the production of fruit-based drinks was not liable to excise duty. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed as they failed to prove the marketability and preservative content of the sugar syrup. The Tribunal also found the demand for excise duty was not sustainable within the time limit and confirmed the lower appellate authority&#039;s decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2017 12:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=432796" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 916 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329207</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that sugar syrup manufactured as an intermediary product during the production of fruit-based drinks was not liable to excise duty. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed as they failed to prove the marketability and preservative content of the sugar syrup. The Tribunal also found the demand for excise duty was not sustainable within the time limit and confirmed the lower appellate authority&#039;s decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329207</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>