<?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>1986 (1) TMI 221 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72178</link>
    <description>The Tribunal concluded that issuing a notice within six months, even if not physically delivered, fulfills the requirement under Section 110(2) of the Customs Act. The show-cause notice sent by registered post was deemed timely and valid. The case was remanded to the Collector of Customs (Appeals) for a decision on the merits, leaving the jurisdictional issue open for the respondent to raise before the Collector of Customs (Appeals).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jan 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 May 2011 10:36:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=110457" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (1) TMI 221 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72178</link>
      <description>The Tribunal concluded that issuing a notice within six months, even if not physically delivered, fulfills the requirement under Section 110(2) of the Customs Act. The show-cause notice sent by registered post was deemed timely and valid. The case was remanded to the Collector of Customs (Appeals) for a decision on the merits, leaving the jurisdictional issue open for the respondent to raise before the Collector of Customs (Appeals).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jan 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72178</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>