<?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>2014 (3) TMI 1092 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194352</link>
    <description>Multiple appeals were grouped for early disposal because they involved substantially similar facts and legal questions already decided by the Tribunal in M/s. Neelav Jaiswal &amp; Brothers v. CCE, Allahabad. Counsel for the appellants conceded that the present issues were covered by that earlier ruling, and the Tribunal therefore dismissed the appeals on the same reasoning as in the prior decision. No costs were ordered.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Sep 2017 18:11:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=488256" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (3) TMI 1092 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194352</link>
      <description>Multiple appeals were grouped for early disposal because they involved substantially similar facts and legal questions already decided by the Tribunal in M/s. Neelav Jaiswal &amp; Brothers v. CCE, Allahabad. Counsel for the appellants conceded that the present issues were covered by that earlier ruling, and the Tribunal therefore dismissed the appeals on the same reasoning as in the prior decision. No costs were ordered.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194352</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>