<?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 (8) TMI 384 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331000</link>
    <description>The High Court admitted the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem, based on a specific substantial question of law related to the omission of Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Court directed fresh adjudication by the Tribunal, emphasizing proper notice to the respondent/assessee and the need for a speaking order to be passed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Nov 2016 14:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=437873" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 384 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331000</link>
      <description>The High Court admitted the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem, based on a specific substantial question of law related to the omission of Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Court directed fresh adjudication by the Tribunal, emphasizing proper notice to the respondent/assessee and the need for a speaking order to be passed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331000</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>