<?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>2019 (1) TMI 239 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373074</link>
    <description>A clerical error in the notification number cited in the Final Order was sought to be corrected in paras 3, 6 and 9. The Tribunal found that the reference had been wrongly mentioned and accepted the objection as correct. It directed that the incorrect notification citation be read as the correct notification number, thereby rectifying the typographical mistake in the Final Order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2019 12:18:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=551406" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 239 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373074</link>
      <description>A clerical error in the notification number cited in the Final Order was sought to be corrected in paras 3, 6 and 9. The Tribunal found that the reference had been wrongly mentioned and accepted the objection as correct. It directed that the incorrect notification citation be read as the correct notification number, thereby rectifying the typographical mistake in the Final Order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373074</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>