<?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 (12) TMI 6 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371237</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that vulcanised rubber tubes manufactured by the appellant cannot be considered as &quot;parts, components, and assemblies of automobiles&quot; under the relevant notifications. The Tribunal upheld the orders dropping the Central Excise duty demand, emphasizing a merit-based resolution over the retrospective applicability of a Board Circular. The appeals filed by the Revenue were rejected, and the impugned orders were upheld, concluding the case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2018 16:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=544935" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 6 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371237</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that vulcanised rubber tubes manufactured by the appellant cannot be considered as &quot;parts, components, and assemblies of automobiles&quot; under the relevant notifications. The Tribunal upheld the orders dropping the Central Excise duty demand, emphasizing a merit-based resolution over the retrospective applicability of a Board Circular. The appeals filed by the Revenue were rejected, and the impugned orders were upheld, concluding the case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371237</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>