<?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>2003 (12) TMI 168 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52482</link>
    <description>The judgment upheld duty demands on the appellant for manufacturing parts during the exemption-interim period, emphasizing the marketability and dutiability of the parts under Tariff Heading 8607. The rejection of the appeal was based on consistent tribunal decisions and legal precedents supporting the classification of such parts as liable to central excise duty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2010 10:57:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90959" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (12) TMI 168 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52482</link>
      <description>The judgment upheld duty demands on the appellant for manufacturing parts during the exemption-interim period, emphasizing the marketability and dutiability of the parts under Tariff Heading 8607. The rejection of the appeal was based on consistent tribunal decisions and legal precedents supporting the classification of such parts as liable to central excise duty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52482</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>