<?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>Court Rules Extended 5-Year Limitation Period Unjustified in Duty Liability Case; Demand Set Aside.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=14365</link>
    <description>Non-discharge of Duty Liability – Period of Limitation - surprisingly it was also curious to note that the show cause notice specifically stated that the statement of the employee of the appellant was recorded only for invokement of five years i.e. extended period - demand set aside - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 07 Sep 2013 14:47:42 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Sep 2013 14:47:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=299901" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Court Rules Extended 5-Year Limitation Period Unjustified in Duty Liability Case; Demand Set Aside.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=14365</link>
      <description>Non-discharge of Duty Liability – Period of Limitation - surprisingly it was also curious to note that the show cause notice specifically stated that the statement of the employee of the appellant was recorded only for invokement of five years i.e. extended period - demand set aside - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 07 Sep 2013 14:47:42 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=14365</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>