<?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 (7) TMI 1820 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295221</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal solely on the ground of limitation. It found that the period in dispute was May 2013, and the show cause notice issued in February 2017 invoked the extended period of limitation. Due to proper disclosures made by the appellant and the absence of willful suppression, the demand of duty, interest, and penalty were set aside. The appeal was allowed with consequential relief as per law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 May 2021 08:37:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=645032" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (7) TMI 1820 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295221</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal solely on the ground of limitation. It found that the period in dispute was May 2013, and the show cause notice issued in February 2017 invoked the extended period of limitation. Due to proper disclosures made by the appellant and the absence of willful suppression, the demand of duty, interest, and penalty were set aside. The appeal was allowed with consequential relief as per law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295221</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>