<?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>2019 (2) TMI 936 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375309</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal filed by the Appellant. The Commissioner&#039;s failure to follow the Tribunal&#039;s decision was considered an error, emphasizing the binding nature of Tribunal decisions on lower authorities unless referred to a Larger Bench. Judicial discipline and propriety were underscored, highlighting the importance of adherence to previous decisions and legal principles.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2019 16:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=558441" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (2) TMI 936 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375309</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal filed by the Appellant. The Commissioner&#039;s failure to follow the Tribunal&#039;s decision was considered an error, emphasizing the binding nature of Tribunal decisions on lower authorities unless referred to a Larger Bench. Judicial discipline and propriety were underscored, highlighting the importance of adherence to previous decisions and legal principles.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375309</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>