<?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>2015 (4) TMI 1224 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198361</link>
    <description>Section 3A(4) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 permits re-determination of duty liability on the basis of actual production under the compound levy scheme. A request for such re-determination could not be rejected solely because the assessee was under BIFR; the competent authority had to examine the evidence and production data placed on record. The matter was therefore required to be sent back for fresh determination on actual production basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Jan 2018 08:26:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=506537" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (4) TMI 1224 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198361</link>
      <description>Section 3A(4) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 permits re-determination of duty liability on the basis of actual production under the compound levy scheme. A request for such re-determination could not be rejected solely because the assessee was under BIFR; the competent authority had to examine the evidence and production data placed on record. The matter was therefore required to be sent back for fresh determination on actual production basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198361</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>