<?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>2007 (12) TMI 378 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123434</link>
    <description>A second application for rectification of an order passed on an earlier rectification request under Section 129B(2) of the Customs Act is not maintainable. The settled view applied by CESTAT is that once a rectification application has been decided, a further attempt to seek correction of that rectification order is impermissible. The Tribunal relied on prior Larger Bench rulings taking the same approach and dismissed the second rectification application.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2012 10:10:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=160400" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (12) TMI 378 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123434</link>
      <description>A second application for rectification of an order passed on an earlier rectification request under Section 129B(2) of the Customs Act is not maintainable. The settled view applied by CESTAT is that once a rectification application has been decided, a further attempt to seek correction of that rectification order is impermissible. The Tribunal relied on prior Larger Bench rulings taking the same approach and dismissed the second rectification application.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123434</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>