<?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 (6) TMI 903 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344632</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the order confirming a demand for special excise duty and penalties on the appellant for selling motor vehicles without the seventh tyre, making them ineligible for exemption under Notification No.6/2002-CE. The appellant&#039;s argument that the notification only applied to manufacturing processes, not sales, was rejected. The Tribunal emphasized the statutory requirement of motor vehicles to have seven tyres at the point of sale, leading to the dismissal of the appeals. Strict compliance with statutory provisions and notification conditions was deemed essential, justifying the duty demand due to the breach of notification conditions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Aug 2017 10:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=473975" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (6) TMI 903 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344632</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the order confirming a demand for special excise duty and penalties on the appellant for selling motor vehicles without the seventh tyre, making them ineligible for exemption under Notification No.6/2002-CE. The appellant&#039;s argument that the notification only applied to manufacturing processes, not sales, was rejected. The Tribunal emphasized the statutory requirement of motor vehicles to have seven tyres at the point of sale, leading to the dismissal of the appeals. Strict compliance with statutory provisions and notification conditions was deemed essential, justifying the duty demand due to the breach of notification conditions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344632</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>