<?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>2014 (8) TMI 322 - CESTAT  MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250372</link>
    <description>Where a duty demand was already set aside on limitation and that finding was left unchallenged, the Revenue&#039;s merits-based challenge could not revive the demand. The unassailed time-bar determination continued to sustain the setting aside of the demand, and the merits argument, even if examined, was insufficient to dislodge that basis. The appeals were therefore without merit and were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Aug 2015 16:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=361845" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (8) TMI 322 - CESTAT  MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250372</link>
      <description>Where a duty demand was already set aside on limitation and that finding was left unchallenged, the Revenue&#039;s merits-based challenge could not revive the demand. The unassailed time-bar determination continued to sustain the setting aside of the demand, and the merits argument, even if examined, was insufficient to dislodge that basis. The appeals were therefore without merit and were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250372</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>