<?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 (7) TMI 313 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363005</link>
    <description>The Tribunal remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for segregating the demand for March 2015, while allowing the appeal for the remaining period. The decision provided a nuanced interpretation of Rule 6 in light of the specific circumstances of waste products generated during the manufacturing process, emphasizing the impact of the rule amendment on the appellant&#039;s liability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Jul 2018 17:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=525974" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 313 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363005</link>
      <description>The Tribunal remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for segregating the demand for March 2015, while allowing the appeal for the remaining period. The decision provided a nuanced interpretation of Rule 6 in light of the specific circumstances of waste products generated during the manufacturing process, emphasizing the impact of the rule amendment on the appellant&#039;s liability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363005</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>