<?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>2017 (5) TMI 1813 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309827</link>
    <description>Heena Powder, Heena Dye Powder and Heena Cone (paste) were examined against the applicable exemption notification for the period 01.08.2008 to 01.11.2011. The goods were treated as classifiable under Chapter 33 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, and the notification was found to cover the disputed period. As a result, the confirmed demand of duty, interest and penalty could not be sustained, and the demand was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Sep 2023 18:26:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=726966" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 1813 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309827</link>
      <description>Heena Powder, Heena Dye Powder and Heena Cone (paste) were examined against the applicable exemption notification for the period 01.08.2008 to 01.11.2011. The goods were treated as classifiable under Chapter 33 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, and the notification was found to cover the disputed period. As a result, the confirmed demand of duty, interest and penalty could not be sustained, and the demand was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309827</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>