<?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>1999 (3) TMI 333 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93083</link>
    <description>The Tribunal rectified its final order, granting the benefit of Notification 40/85 to the assessee based on a subsequent Supreme Court judgment. The application for rectification under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 was deemed valid, citing precedents allowing rectification based on later judicial pronouncements. However, there was a divergence on the Tribunal&#039;s authority to recall orders, leading to a referral to a Larger Bench for clarification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2011 12:15:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=130144" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (3) TMI 333 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93083</link>
      <description>The Tribunal rectified its final order, granting the benefit of Notification 40/85 to the assessee based on a subsequent Supreme Court judgment. The application for rectification under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 was deemed valid, citing precedents allowing rectification based on later judicial pronouncements. However, there was a divergence on the Tribunal&#039;s authority to recall orders, leading to a referral to a Larger Bench for clarification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93083</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>