<?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 1136 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330538</link>
    <description>A limitation-based relief under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was found unsustainable because the appellate authority had not examined the merits of the demand. As the lower appellate order disposed of the dispute only on limitation, without deciding the substantive liability, the matter required fresh consideration. The Tribunal therefore set aside the limitation finding and remanded the case to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the appeal afresh on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2016 17:53:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=436566" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 1136 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330538</link>
      <description>A limitation-based relief under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was found unsustainable because the appellate authority had not examined the merits of the demand. As the lower appellate order disposed of the dispute only on limitation, without deciding the substantive liability, the matter required fresh consideration. The Tribunal therefore set aside the limitation finding and remanded the case to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the appeal afresh on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330538</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>