<?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 (11) TMI 31 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252714</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the orders confirming demands and penalties. It held that the additional considerations alleged by the Revenue were not connected to the sale of motorcycles. The demand raised under the extended period of limitation was deemed time-barred as the appellants had disclosed all relevant information to the authorities, and the issue involved a bona fide interpretation of law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2015 16:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=367867" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (11) TMI 31 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252714</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the orders confirming demands and penalties. It held that the additional considerations alleged by the Revenue were not connected to the sale of motorcycles. The demand raised under the extended period of limitation was deemed time-barred as the appellants had disclosed all relevant information to the authorities, and the issue involved a bona fide interpretation of law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252714</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>