<?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>2018 (5) TMI 111 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359547</link>
    <description>Delay was condoned, but the special leave petition was dismissed and no interference was made with the High Court&#039;s order. The Court confined itself to declining relief in the petition and did not articulate any substantive reasoning altering the impugned decision. It also expressly left open the broader question of law for determination in an appropriate future case, so no authoritative ruling was given on that point in the present matter.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 May 2018 06:22:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=518703" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (5) TMI 111 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359547</link>
      <description>Delay was condoned, but the special leave petition was dismissed and no interference was made with the High Court&#039;s order. The Court confined itself to declining relief in the petition and did not articulate any substantive reasoning altering the impugned decision. It also expressly left open the broader question of law for determination in an appropriate future case, so no authoritative ruling was given on that point in the present matter.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359547</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>