<?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>2005 (1) TMI 484 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115066</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the Signal Generator is classified under Heading 85.43 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, rejecting the appellant&#039;s argument that it should be under Heading 90.31. Additionally, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant regarding the extended period of limitation issue, deeming the modified show cause notice as a new notice triggering the limitation period and rejecting the increased duty demand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 15:11:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152065" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (1) TMI 484 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115066</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the Signal Generator is classified under Heading 85.43 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, rejecting the appellant&#039;s argument that it should be under Heading 90.31. Additionally, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant regarding the extended period of limitation issue, deeming the modified show cause notice as a new notice triggering the limitation period and rejecting the increased duty demand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115066</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>