<?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 (8) TMI 601 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210368</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the rejection of the settlement application by the Settlement Commission, emphasizing the necessity of complying with statutory provisions for availing exemptions and settling excise duty liabilities. The judgment underscores the criticality of fulfilling registration, duty payment, and return filing requirements as mandated by the Central Excise Act, 1944, for seeking settlement under Section 32E(1) of the Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Mar 2013 17:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=183803" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (8) TMI 601 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210368</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the rejection of the settlement application by the Settlement Commission, emphasizing the necessity of complying with statutory provisions for availing exemptions and settling excise duty liabilities. The judgment underscores the criticality of fulfilling registration, duty payment, and return filing requirements as mandated by the Central Excise Act, 1944, for seeking settlement under Section 32E(1) of the Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210368</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>