<?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 (8) TMI 351 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118582</link>
    <description>A rectification application under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act had to be filed within six months from the date of the final order, and the provision contained no power to condone delay. Because the application was filed beyond that statutory period, it was held to be time-barred and not maintainable, and the rectification request failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Jul 2012 12:46:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=155579" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (8) TMI 351 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118582</link>
      <description>A rectification application under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act had to be filed within six months from the date of the final order, and the provision contained no power to condone delay. Because the application was filed beyond that statutory period, it was held to be time-barred and not maintainable, and the rectification request failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118582</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>