<?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>2014 (11) TMI 1100 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187918</link>
    <description>The Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the Commission&#039;s order and remanding the matter for fresh consideration. The Commission was directed to consider the previous payment and the admitted higher duty liability, granting the petitioner sufficient time for payment to be entitled to immunity from penalty and prosecution. No costs were awarded, and the connected Miscellaneous Petition was closed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2016 11:17:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=447387" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (11) TMI 1100 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187918</link>
      <description>The Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the Commission&#039;s order and remanding the matter for fresh consideration. The Commission was directed to consider the previous payment and the admitted higher duty liability, granting the petitioner sufficient time for payment to be entitled to immunity from penalty and prosecution. No costs were awarded, and the connected Miscellaneous Petition was closed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187918</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>