<?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 (5) TMI 30 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342292</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal by the appellants, as the withdrawal of the facility based on the adverse notice that had been set aside was not justified. The Revenue was given the liberty to initiate fresh proceedings in case of any other subsequent adverse notices. The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was set aside in light of the invalidity of the adverse notice relied upon for withdrawing the facility.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 May 2017 08:56:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=467206" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 30 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342292</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal by the appellants, as the withdrawal of the facility based on the adverse notice that had been set aside was not justified. The Revenue was given the liberty to initiate fresh proceedings in case of any other subsequent adverse notices. The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was set aside in light of the invalidity of the adverse notice relied upon for withdrawing the facility.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342292</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>