<?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>2006 (10) TMI 386 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160023</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court of India dismissed civil appeals, ruling that the Department is not entitled to an extended period of limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act. The Tribunal&#039;s decision to reverse the Commissioner&#039;s ruling was upheld based on the detailed invoices filed by the assessee along with the RT-12 return in May 1996.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Apr 2014 14:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=338475" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (10) TMI 386 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160023</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court of India dismissed civil appeals, ruling that the Department is not entitled to an extended period of limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act. The Tribunal&#039;s decision to reverse the Commissioner&#039;s ruling was upheld based on the detailed invoices filed by the assessee along with the RT-12 return in May 1996.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160023</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>