<?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>2007 (4) TMI 686 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173812</link>
    <description>Delay was condoned, and the Supreme Court found no merit in the revenue&#039;s civil appeal, which was dismissed. The Court also clarified that the assessee would remain entitled to any refund, if due, in accordance with law. The order is limited to these operative directions and does not set out any further reasoning on the central excise dispute.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2015 18:43:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=398344" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (4) TMI 686 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173812</link>
      <description>Delay was condoned, and the Supreme Court found no merit in the revenue&#039;s civil appeal, which was dismissed. The Court also clarified that the assessee would remain entitled to any refund, if due, in accordance with law. The order is limited to these operative directions and does not set out any further reasoning on the central excise dispute.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173812</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>