<?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>1997 (12) TMI 395 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88977</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision rejecting the appellant&#039;s arguments regarding clandestine removal of goods and small-scale exemption claim. However, a legal question arose on the time-barred show cause notice under Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, leading to conflicting Tribunal decisions. Consequently, the Tribunal directed both parties to prepare a statement of facts for a High Court reference to resolve the legal uncertainty on the limitation issue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Sep 2011 16:22:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126040" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (12) TMI 395 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88977</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision rejecting the appellant&#039;s arguments regarding clandestine removal of goods and small-scale exemption claim. However, a legal question arose on the time-barred show cause notice under Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, leading to conflicting Tribunal decisions. Consequently, the Tribunal directed both parties to prepare a statement of facts for a High Court reference to resolve the legal uncertainty on the limitation issue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88977</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>