<?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 (9) TMI 1170 - CESTAT  ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332909</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the Order-in-Original and allowed the appeal in favor of the appellants in a case concerning the demand of Central Excise duty on laminates. The Tribunal found that the show cause notice had contradictory stands on the admissibility of Cenvat Credit, leading to the unsustainable demand under Rule 6(3)(b). Consequently, the appellants were granted all consequential reliefs as per the law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2017 11:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=443153" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 1170 - CESTAT  ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332909</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the Order-in-Original and allowed the appeal in favor of the appellants in a case concerning the demand of Central Excise duty on laminates. The Tribunal found that the show cause notice had contradictory stands on the admissibility of Cenvat Credit, leading to the unsustainable demand under Rule 6(3)(b). Consequently, the appellants were granted all consequential reliefs as per the law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332909</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>