<?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>2015 (11) TMI 1834 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295562</link>
    <description>Low tax effect led the Supreme Court to decline interference in the central excise appeals, and the appeals were dismissed on that ground alone. The order does not decide any substantive excise issue; it reflects only the Court&#039;s practice of not entertaining matters where the tax effect is too small to justify adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2021 09:24:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=646304" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (11) TMI 1834 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295562</link>
      <description>Low tax effect led the Supreme Court to decline interference in the central excise appeals, and the appeals were dismissed on that ground alone. The order does not decide any substantive excise issue; it reflects only the Court&#039;s practice of not entertaining matters where the tax effect is too small to justify adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295562</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>