<?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 (9) TMI 1433 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367697</link>
    <description>The High Court modified the remand order, directing the Commissioner to re-examine the case and determine the appropriate ratio for the new product &#039;Premium Khaini&#039; based on evidence presented by the appellant. The Court found that the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) failed to address the appellant&#039;s contentions regarding the distinct raw material ratios for the separate product, leading to the modification of the impugned order to ensure a fair adjudication of the matter.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2019 10:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=535737" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 1433 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367697</link>
      <description>The High Court modified the remand order, directing the Commissioner to re-examine the case and determine the appropriate ratio for the new product &#039;Premium Khaini&#039; based on evidence presented by the appellant. The Court found that the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) failed to address the appellant&#039;s contentions regarding the distinct raw material ratios for the separate product, leading to the modification of the impugned order to ensure a fair adjudication of the matter.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367697</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>