<?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 (5) TMI 1224 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380496</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the appellant, engaged in manufacturing automobile parts, was not liable to pay duty on scrap generated at the end of a job worker who had already paid duty on the same. Citing precedents and relevant rules, the Tribunal ruled that demanding duty from the appellant would result in impermissible double taxation. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with any consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2019 07:23:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=572306" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (5) TMI 1224 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380496</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the appellant, engaged in manufacturing automobile parts, was not liable to pay duty on scrap generated at the end of a job worker who had already paid duty on the same. Citing precedents and relevant rules, the Tribunal ruled that demanding duty from the appellant would result in impermissible double taxation. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with any consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380496</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>