<?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>2020 (11) TMI 350 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400595</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the adjudicating authority to issue a fresh order within three months. The Tribunal clarified that the remand should be open concerning the total duty amount, expunging the observation that the appellant did not dispute the goods&#039; removal. The decision emphasized adherence to natural justice principles and the age of the matter (2005-2006), ultimately favoring the appellant in resolving the dispute over duty amount and penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2020 11:57:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=627484" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (11) TMI 350 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400595</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the adjudicating authority to issue a fresh order within three months. The Tribunal clarified that the remand should be open concerning the total duty amount, expunging the observation that the appellant did not dispute the goods&#039; removal. The decision emphasized adherence to natural justice principles and the age of the matter (2005-2006), ultimately favoring the appellant in resolving the dispute over duty amount and penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400595</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>