<?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>2017 (2) TMI 882 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339182</link>
    <description>The Tribunal modified the impugned order, remanding the matter for a fresh adjudication order considering the Tribunal&#039;s observations. The assessment was deemed final, not provisional, as no provisional assessment order was passed. The issue of time bar required further examination by the adjudicating authority along with the valuation issue, leading to the appeal being allowed by remand to the original adjudicating authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2017 23:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=459256" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 882 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339182</link>
      <description>The Tribunal modified the impugned order, remanding the matter for a fresh adjudication order considering the Tribunal&#039;s observations. The assessment was deemed final, not provisional, as no provisional assessment order was passed. The issue of time bar required further examination by the adjudicating authority along with the valuation issue, leading to the appeal being allowed by remand to the original adjudicating authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339182</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>