<?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 (10) TMI 955 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333935</link>
    <description>The High Court declined to interfere with the Tribunal&#039;s finding that there was no obligation for the assessee to deposit or credit the excise duty amount collected from customers. The Court held that the evidence of duty collection was lacking, and there was no perversity in the Tribunal&#039;s order regarding concessional duty rates. Consequently, the appeal by the Revenue was dismissed as the Court found no grounds for further appellate jurisdiction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Jan 2017 17:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=446204" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (10) TMI 955 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333935</link>
      <description>The High Court declined to interfere with the Tribunal&#039;s finding that there was no obligation for the assessee to deposit or credit the excise duty amount collected from customers. The Court held that the evidence of duty collection was lacking, and there was no perversity in the Tribunal&#039;s order regarding concessional duty rates. Consequently, the appeal by the Revenue was dismissed as the Court found no grounds for further appellate jurisdiction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333935</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>