<?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 (6) TMI 582 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212921</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found the demand for recovery of set-off duty under Notification No. 178/77-C.E. to be time-barred and unsustainable. However, the demand for recovery of set-off duty under Notification No. 201/79-C.E. was deemed valid and sustainable. The Tribunal directed the adjudicating authority to quantify the revised amount of demand accordingly, setting aside the impugned order and partially allowing the appeal. The cross-objection filed by the respondent was also disposed of.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 May 2012 08:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=186325" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (6) TMI 582 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212921</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found the demand for recovery of set-off duty under Notification No. 178/77-C.E. to be time-barred and unsustainable. However, the demand for recovery of set-off duty under Notification No. 201/79-C.E. was deemed valid and sustainable. The Tribunal directed the adjudicating authority to quantify the revised amount of demand accordingly, setting aside the impugned order and partially allowing the appeal. The cross-objection filed by the respondent was also disposed of.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212921</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>