<?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 1426 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375799</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed by way of remand as the impugned order did not quantify the demand on physician samples cleared for free distribution separately for two distinct situations. The matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority to pass a fresh order in line with the assessment principles discussed for both scenarios, one involving physician samples manufactured for loan licensees and the other for free distribution to physicians.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2019 07:22:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=559948" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (2) TMI 1426 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375799</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed by way of remand as the impugned order did not quantify the demand on physician samples cleared for free distribution separately for two distinct situations. The matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority to pass a fresh order in line with the assessment principles discussed for both scenarios, one involving physician samples manufactured for loan licensees and the other for free distribution to physicians.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375799</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>