<?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>2022 (5) TMI 901 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422641</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s decision, dismissing the appellant&#039;s appeal. The judgment focused on compliance with exemption conditions, contradictions in statements, and the invocation of the extended period of limitation. The detailed analysis of evidence and legal provisions formed the basis for the decision, emphasizing the importance of meeting statutory requirements for exemptions and the burden of proof in excise duty matters.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 May 2022 08:59:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=679625" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (5) TMI 901 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422641</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s decision, dismissing the appellant&#039;s appeal. The judgment focused on compliance with exemption conditions, contradictions in statements, and the invocation of the extended period of limitation. The detailed analysis of evidence and legal provisions formed the basis for the decision, emphasizing the importance of meeting statutory requirements for exemptions and the burden of proof in excise duty matters.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422641</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>