<?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 (12) TMI 439 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123746</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that if part of a show cause notice is deemed without jurisdiction, the entire notice is invalid. Referring to the doctrine of merger, the Tribunal emphasized that once a decision is confirmed by the Supreme Court, it settles the law on the issue. Upholding the decision in the Alcobex Metals case, the Tribunal set aside the order upholding confiscation of goods, allowing the appeal with consequential relief for the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2012 18:52:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=160707" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (12) TMI 439 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123746</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that if part of a show cause notice is deemed without jurisdiction, the entire notice is invalid. Referring to the doctrine of merger, the Tribunal emphasized that once a decision is confirmed by the Supreme Court, it settles the law on the issue. Upholding the decision in the Alcobex Metals case, the Tribunal set aside the order upholding confiscation of goods, allowing the appeal with consequential relief for the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123746</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>