<?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>1995 (12) TMI 74 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44198</link>
    <description>The Tribunal, while dealing with stay and dispensation of pre-deposit, was required to consider the petitioner&#039;s jurisdictional plea that the excise duty demand was without authority and resulted in double taxation. As that plea had not been examined, the matter was remanded for fresh consideration of that issue in accordance with law after hearing both sides.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2010 17:40:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=82727" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (12) TMI 74 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44198</link>
      <description>The Tribunal, while dealing with stay and dispensation of pre-deposit, was required to consider the petitioner&#039;s jurisdictional plea that the excise duty demand was without authority and resulted in double taxation. As that plea had not been examined, the matter was remanded for fresh consideration of that issue in accordance with law after hearing both sides.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44198</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>