<?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 (11) TMI 5 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350126</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal regarding the excise duty valuation on Lime mixed chewing tobacco. It held that the respondent&#039;s method of packing did not fall under the Chewing Tobacco Rules, 2010, as the pouches were packed with a machine and were not subject to duty under Section 3A. The Tribunal emphasized that the rules did not apply to the respondent&#039;s process, leading to the dismissal of the appeal and upholding the Commissioner (Appeals) order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2017 10:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=494222" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (11) TMI 5 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350126</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal regarding the excise duty valuation on Lime mixed chewing tobacco. It held that the respondent&#039;s method of packing did not fall under the Chewing Tobacco Rules, 2010, as the pouches were packed with a machine and were not subject to duty under Section 3A. The Tribunal emphasized that the rules did not apply to the respondent&#039;s process, leading to the dismissal of the appeal and upholding the Commissioner (Appeals) order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350126</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>