<?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>2006 (2) TMI 406 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117670</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed both appeals by way of remand, directing the Commissioner to reevaluate the limitation issue after considering all relevant communications and providing the appellant with an opportunity to make submissions before passing a new order. The Commissioner&#039;s decision on the service of the order was deemed incomplete, necessitating a fresh determination after reviewing all communications between the department and the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2012 17:11:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=154667" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (2) TMI 406 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117670</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed both appeals by way of remand, directing the Commissioner to reevaluate the limitation issue after considering all relevant communications and providing the appellant with an opportunity to make submissions before passing a new order. The Commissioner&#039;s decision on the service of the order was deemed incomplete, necessitating a fresh determination after reviewing all communications between the department and the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117670</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>