<?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>2008 (6) TMI 23 - CESTAT Bangalore</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30476</link>
    <description>The appeal was successful as the court found that Regulation 7 is procedural and not determinative of eligibility for concessional assessment. The lack of evidence regarding equipment installation was noted, and the court emphasized the importance of natural justice, highlighting the violation of not providing a show cause opportunity and personal hearing. Considering the Chartered Engineer&#039;s Certificate and Director&#039;s affidavit confirming equipment installation, the appellants were deemed entitled to the concessional rate. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed with consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=69131" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (6) TMI 23 - CESTAT Bangalore</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30476</link>
      <description>The appeal was successful as the court found that Regulation 7 is procedural and not determinative of eligibility for concessional assessment. The lack of evidence regarding equipment installation was noted, and the court emphasized the importance of natural justice, highlighting the violation of not providing a show cause opportunity and personal hearing. Considering the Chartered Engineer&#039;s Certificate and Director&#039;s affidavit confirming equipment installation, the appellants were deemed entitled to the concessional rate. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed with consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30476</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>