<?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>2017 (1) TMI 220 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337140</link>
    <description>Adjudication under a show cause notice cannot be sustained on grounds not specifically invoked, so the denial of exemption and demand based on change of classification and alleged non-availability of exemption for the relevant period could not be upheld on extraneous grounds. The Revenue&#039;s challenge to dropping of demand failed. On the assessee&#039;s side, duty liability on certain products, including tank mastics and shalikote, required limited re-computation because some varieties were exempt, but a refund could not be granted in these proceedings without a proper refund application. The matter was remanded only for recomputation, not for refund.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2017 08:55:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=454032" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 220 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337140</link>
      <description>Adjudication under a show cause notice cannot be sustained on grounds not specifically invoked, so the denial of exemption and demand based on change of classification and alleged non-availability of exemption for the relevant period could not be upheld on extraneous grounds. The Revenue&#039;s challenge to dropping of demand failed. On the assessee&#039;s side, duty liability on certain products, including tank mastics and shalikote, required limited re-computation because some varieties were exempt, but a refund could not be granted in these proceedings without a proper refund application. The matter was remanded only for recomputation, not for refund.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337140</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>