<?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 (11) TMI 688 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350809</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the interest demand under section 11AB due to the absence of intentional violations and the time-barred nature of the demand. The appeal was allowed, emphasizing the importance of the circumstances surrounding the alleged short payment and the applicability of the limitation period for interest demands as per legal precedents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Nov 2017 04:37:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=495984" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (11) TMI 688 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350809</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the interest demand under section 11AB due to the absence of intentional violations and the time-barred nature of the demand. The appeal was allowed, emphasizing the importance of the circumstances surrounding the alleged short payment and the applicability of the limitation period for interest demands as per legal precedents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350809</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>