<?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>2004 (2) TMI 106 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52698</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the demand of additional duty and penalties imposed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai. The tribunal accepted the argument that the alleged clandestine removal was actually a permissible shrinkage during fabric processing, within the tolerance limit. The orders of Central Excise authorities supporting this were also considered.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2010 12:24:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91175" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (2) TMI 106 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52698</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the demand of additional duty and penalties imposed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai. The tribunal accepted the argument that the alleged clandestine removal was actually a permissible shrinkage during fabric processing, within the tolerance limit. The orders of Central Excise authorities supporting this were also considered.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52698</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>