<?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>2011 (1) TMI 338 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204089</link>
    <description>The court held that the limitation period under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act should apply only to rectification applications initiated by the Tribunal suo-moto, not to those filed by the parties involved. Relying on Supreme Court precedent interpreting a similar provision in the Income Tax Act, the court overruled the Division Bench decision and allowed the appeal. The court set aside the order of the Tribunal, remitting the matter for fresh consideration in line with the correct legal interpretation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 22 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Jul 2011 10:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=177633" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (1) TMI 338 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204089</link>
      <description>The court held that the limitation period under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act should apply only to rectification applications initiated by the Tribunal suo-moto, not to those filed by the parties involved. Relying on Supreme Court precedent interpreting a similar provision in the Income Tax Act, the court overruled the Division Bench decision and allowed the appeal. The court set aside the order of the Tribunal, remitting the matter for fresh consideration in line with the correct legal interpretation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 22 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204089</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>