<?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>2003 (8) TMI 587 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308011</link>
    <description>Where the Commissioner (Appeals) had set aside the demand on both merits and limitation, the Tribunal held that the Revenue&#039;s appeal could not proceed because the finding that the show cause notice was time-barred remained unchallenged. Since no ground was raised before the Tribunal against the limitation finding, that conclusion attained finality and the dispute did not survive for further examination. The appeal was therefore rejected in favour of the assessee on limitation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 May 2023 17:15:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=714427" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (8) TMI 587 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308011</link>
      <description>Where the Commissioner (Appeals) had set aside the demand on both merits and limitation, the Tribunal held that the Revenue&#039;s appeal could not proceed because the finding that the show cause notice was time-barred remained unchallenged. Since no ground was raised before the Tribunal against the limitation finding, that conclusion attained finality and the dispute did not survive for further examination. The appeal was therefore rejected in favour of the assessee on limitation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308011</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>