<?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 (11) TMI 239 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35131</link>
    <description>A legal plea based on subsequent judicial pronouncements can be raised even if not taken earlier, because a declaration of law applies to all relevant periods. The Tribunal held that the proposed additional grounds on non-manufacture were purely legal and directly relevant to the duty demand arising from enamelling activity. As those later decisions had not been examined by the adjudicating authority, the matter required fresh consideration. The miscellaneous application for additional grounds was allowed, the impugned order was set aside, and the dispute was remanded for fresh adjudication on whether the activity amounted to manufacture.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=73735" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (11) TMI 239 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35131</link>
      <description>A legal plea based on subsequent judicial pronouncements can be raised even if not taken earlier, because a declaration of law applies to all relevant periods. The Tribunal held that the proposed additional grounds on non-manufacture were purely legal and directly relevant to the duty demand arising from enamelling activity. As those later decisions had not been examined by the adjudicating authority, the matter required fresh consideration. The miscellaneous application for additional grounds was allowed, the impugned order was set aside, and the dispute was remanded for fresh adjudication on whether the activity amounted to manufacture.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35131</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>