<?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 (7) TMI 629 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330031</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the demand for denial of credit on TMT Rebar Coils, TMT Rebar, and cement was time-barred as the appellant had disclosed necessary details in their returns and there was no evidence of suppression to evade duty payment. The extended period was deemed inapplicable, leading to the demand being unsustainable. The appeal was allowed, setting aside the original order, with the judgment delivered on May 9, 2016.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2016 23:12:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=435103" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 629 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330031</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the demand for denial of credit on TMT Rebar Coils, TMT Rebar, and cement was time-barred as the appellant had disclosed necessary details in their returns and there was no evidence of suppression to evade duty payment. The extended period was deemed inapplicable, leading to the demand being unsustainable. The appeal was allowed, setting aside the original order, with the judgment delivered on May 9, 2016.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330031</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>