<?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 (9) TMI 521 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124220</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant. The Commissioner&#039;s review order was deemed time-barred as it was issued after the one-year limit from the date of the initial order, following the precedent that the period for review under Section 35E should be calculated from the date of the original order, not its receipt by authorities.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2012 18:03:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=161174" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (9) TMI 521 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124220</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant. The Commissioner&#039;s review order was deemed time-barred as it was issued after the one-year limit from the date of the initial order, following the precedent that the period for review under Section 35E should be calculated from the date of the original order, not its receipt by authorities.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124220</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>