<?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>2004 (6) TMI 454 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112531</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner&#039;s order confirming a demand under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 without imposing a penalty, due to improper issuance of notice on a provisional refund and failure to review the Assistant Commissioner&#039;s order as mandated by law. The appellant&#039;s appeal was allowed based on the procedural errors identified, emphasizing the necessity for adherence to statutory provisions and judicial precedents in excise matters.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2012 15:05:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=149547" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (6) TMI 454 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112531</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner&#039;s order confirming a demand under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 without imposing a penalty, due to improper issuance of notice on a provisional refund and failure to review the Assistant Commissioner&#039;s order as mandated by law. The appellant&#039;s appeal was allowed based on the procedural errors identified, emphasizing the necessity for adherence to statutory provisions and judicial precedents in excise matters.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112531</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>