<?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>2016 (1) TMI 386 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270594</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order on the ground of limitation, allowing the appeal. The classification of the products under Heading 7326 was upheld, but the demand for differential duty was deemed time-barred, and consequently, no penalties or interest were imposed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 May 2016 16:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=412644" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (1) TMI 386 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270594</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order on the ground of limitation, allowing the appeal. The classification of the products under Heading 7326 was upheld, but the demand for differential duty was deemed time-barred, and consequently, no penalties or interest were imposed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270594</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>