<?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>2009 (2) TMI 530 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125159</link>
    <description>The case involved a dispute over the limitation period for issuing a show cause notice under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act. The appellant contested the notice issued after two years, arguing it was time-barred, while the Department sought a longer limitation period of five years for clandestine removal cases. The Tribunal, noting conflicting views on the issue, referred the matter to a Larger Bench for clarification on the applicable limitation period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Oct 2012 10:59:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=162080" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (2) TMI 530 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125159</link>
      <description>The case involved a dispute over the limitation period for issuing a show cause notice under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act. The appellant contested the notice issued after two years, arguing it was time-barred, while the Department sought a longer limitation period of five years for clandestine removal cases. The Tribunal, noting conflicting views on the issue, referred the matter to a Larger Bench for clarification on the applicable limitation period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125159</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>