<?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>1998 (8) TMI 339 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91255</link>
    <description>Demand for reversal of wrongly taken central excise credit was held barred by limitation because the show cause notice was issued beyond the normal six-month period. The Tribunal applied the Larger Bench view that recovery of such credit is subject to the ordinary limitation period under the Central Excise Rules. As the notice was delayed beyond that period, the demand could not be sustained and the department&#039;s appeal was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Oct 2011 18:18:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128317" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (8) TMI 339 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91255</link>
      <description>Demand for reversal of wrongly taken central excise credit was held barred by limitation because the show cause notice was issued beyond the normal six-month period. The Tribunal applied the Larger Bench view that recovery of such credit is subject to the ordinary limitation period under the Central Excise Rules. As the notice was delayed beyond that period, the demand could not be sustained and the department&#039;s appeal was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91255</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>