<?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 (11) TMI 689 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334671</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT New Delhi dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal against a manufacturer for non-payment of Central Excise duty. The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) in favor of the manufacturer, emphasizing that the manufacturer, who sent raw materials to job workers for processing, was not directly engaged in manufacturing the goods. The Tribunal concluded that the manufacturer could not be considered liable for excise duty as they did not undertake the manufacturing process themselves. The duty liability against the manufacturer was rejected, and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2017 12:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=448318" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 689 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334671</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT New Delhi dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal against a manufacturer for non-payment of Central Excise duty. The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) in favor of the manufacturer, emphasizing that the manufacturer, who sent raw materials to job workers for processing, was not directly engaged in manufacturing the goods. The Tribunal concluded that the manufacturer could not be considered liable for excise duty as they did not undertake the manufacturing process themselves. The duty liability against the manufacturer was rejected, and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334671</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>