<?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 (3) TMI 660 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376639</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s order denying the benefit of exemption to &quot;pipe fittings&quot; under specific notifications, emphasizing the strict interpretation of exemption notifications limited to &quot;pipes.&quot; The Tribunal ruled that the exemption did not extend to &quot;pipe fittings,&quot; citing relevant case law and the clear wording of the notifications. Regarding the limitation in demanding duty, the Tribunal found the appellant compliant and unsustainable demand for duty beyond the normal limitation period. The Tribunal dismissed the imposition of a penalty due to the legal interpretation issue and allowed a change in the cause title.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Mar 2019 14:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=562708" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (3) TMI 660 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376639</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s order denying the benefit of exemption to &quot;pipe fittings&quot; under specific notifications, emphasizing the strict interpretation of exemption notifications limited to &quot;pipes.&quot; The Tribunal ruled that the exemption did not extend to &quot;pipe fittings,&quot; citing relevant case law and the clear wording of the notifications. Regarding the limitation in demanding duty, the Tribunal found the appellant compliant and unsustainable demand for duty beyond the normal limitation period. The Tribunal dismissed the imposition of a penalty due to the legal interpretation issue and allowed a change in the cause title.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376639</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>