<?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 (12) TMI 836 - CEGAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122434</link>
    <description>The appellate tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the duty demand as time-barred due to the appellant&#039;s disclosure of information in advance. The tribunal emphasized that the allegation of suppression was successfully rebutted by the appellant, indicating that both parties were aware of the relevant facts before the show cause notice. The appeal was granted, and the demand was deemed clearly barred by limitation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2012 16:33:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=159419" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (12) TMI 836 - CEGAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122434</link>
      <description>The appellate tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the duty demand as time-barred due to the appellant&#039;s disclosure of information in advance. The tribunal emphasized that the allegation of suppression was successfully rebutted by the appellant, indicating that both parties were aware of the relevant facts before the show cause notice. The appeal was granted, and the demand was deemed clearly barred by limitation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122434</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>