<?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 (5) TMI 1403 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380675</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld the impugned order, rejecting the appeal. It clarified that the demand was time-barred, and no penalty could be imposed due to the absence of grounds for invoking the extended period of limitation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 May 2019 06:57:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=572737" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (5) TMI 1403 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380675</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld the impugned order, rejecting the appeal. It clarified that the demand was time-barred, and no penalty could be imposed due to the absence of grounds for invoking the extended period of limitation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380675</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>