<?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 (11) TMI 1001 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334983</link>
    <description>The court quashed the show cause notice dated 10.2.2015 regarding excise duty on &quot;Pan Samagrai&quot; due to violations of statutory testing procedures. The petitioners successfully argued that the failure to provide test reports and samples for retesting infringed upon statutory rules, leading to the notice&#039;s annulment. The court emphasized that actions breaching statutory provisions cannot be upheld, granting the petitions and allowing the respondents to proceed in compliance with the law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Aug 2017 12:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=449032" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 1001 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334983</link>
      <description>The court quashed the show cause notice dated 10.2.2015 regarding excise duty on &quot;Pan Samagrai&quot; due to violations of statutory testing procedures. The petitioners successfully argued that the failure to provide test reports and samples for retesting infringed upon statutory rules, leading to the notice&#039;s annulment. The court emphasized that actions breaching statutory provisions cannot be upheld, granting the petitions and allowing the respondents to proceed in compliance with the law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334983</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>