<?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>2001 (6) TMI 271 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96222</link>
    <description>A rectification of mistake application cannot succeed merely because a limitation provision in the Central Excise Act was later amended retrospectively. The Tribunal held that the final order was correct on the law prevailing when it was passed, and a subsequent statutory amendment does not by itself amount to a mistake warranting rectification. The application was therefore not maintainable and the earlier final order remained undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2011 11:43:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=133281" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (6) TMI 271 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96222</link>
      <description>A rectification of mistake application cannot succeed merely because a limitation provision in the Central Excise Act was later amended retrospectively. The Tribunal held that the final order was correct on the law prevailing when it was passed, and a subsequent statutory amendment does not by itself amount to a mistake warranting rectification. The application was therefore not maintainable and the earlier final order remained undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96222</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>