https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236881 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled that once an extended period notice has been issued, a subsequent notice for a subsequent period on the same issue cannot be served. The Tribunal distinguished the Uniworth Textiles case cited by the Department and emphasized the importance of the sequence and timing of notices. Relying on the Nizam Sugar Factory case, the Tribunal dismissed the Department's appeal and upheld the Order-in-Original, highlighting the relevance of established legal principles. The judgment was delivered on 11-4-2013. en-us Thu, 11 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Sep 2013 09:59:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236881 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled that once an extended period notice has been issued, a subsequent notice for a subsequent period on the same issue cannot be served. The Tribunal distinguished the Uniworth Textiles case cited by the Department and emphasized the importance of the sequence and timing of notices. Relying on the Nizam Sugar Factory case, the Tribunal dismissed the Department's appeal and upheld the Order-in-Original, highlighting the relevance of established legal principles. The judgment was delivered on 11-4-2013. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 11 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236881