<?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>2018 (3) TMI 446 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356743</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039; decision, ruling that the assessee was liable to pay duty on the depreciated value of capital goods removed. The Tribunal dismissed appeals from both the assessee and the department, affirming the Commissioner&#039;s order and finding no basis for intervention.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Mar 2019 15:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=512160" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (3) TMI 446 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356743</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039; decision, ruling that the assessee was liable to pay duty on the depreciated value of capital goods removed. The Tribunal dismissed appeals from both the assessee and the department, affirming the Commissioner&#039;s order and finding no basis for intervention.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356743</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>