<?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 (2) TMI 144 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2714</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the demand for duty and penalty on brass rods exceeding 10 feet length was time-barred as the appellant had not suppressed any facts, and all relevant information was known to the authorities during the earlier proceeding. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, ruling in favor of the appellant and allowing the appeal against the duty and penalty imposed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 10:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=42067" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (2) TMI 144 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2714</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the demand for duty and penalty on brass rods exceeding 10 feet length was time-barred as the appellant had not suppressed any facts, and all relevant information was known to the authorities during the earlier proceeding. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, ruling in favor of the appellant and allowing the appeal against the duty and penalty imposed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2714</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>