<?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 (3) TMI 6 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339503</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the invocation of the extended period of limitation for demand of duty, rejecting the appellant&#039;s argument based on precedents. Regarding the imposition of penalty on the new management for the old management&#039;s activities after a corporate acquisition, the Tribunal referred the matter to a Larger Bench for clarification on the issue, considering conflicting decisions on penalty imposition in such scenarios.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 Feb 2017 21:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=459979" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 6 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339503</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the invocation of the extended period of limitation for demand of duty, rejecting the appellant&#039;s argument based on precedents. Regarding the imposition of penalty on the new management for the old management&#039;s activities after a corporate acquisition, the Tribunal referred the matter to a Larger Bench for clarification on the issue, considering conflicting decisions on penalty imposition in such scenarios.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339503</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>