<?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>1987 (6) TMI 54 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42219</link>
    <description>Aluminium dross and skimmings were already treated in prior judicial position as not goods and, therefore, not exigible to excise duty; on that footing, the department&#039;s refusal to grant refund was unsustainable. The attempt to reject the refund claim by reclassifying the material under the residuary entry was also found untenable on the record, and the petitioners were held entitled to refund of the duty paid with interest from 1 January 1980 and costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2010 18:23:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=80748" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (6) TMI 54 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42219</link>
      <description>Aluminium dross and skimmings were already treated in prior judicial position as not goods and, therefore, not exigible to excise duty; on that footing, the department&#039;s refusal to grant refund was unsustainable. The attempt to reject the refund claim by reclassifying the material under the residuary entry was also found untenable on the record, and the petitioners were held entitled to refund of the duty paid with interest from 1 January 1980 and costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42219</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>