<?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>2008 (3) TMI 314 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33841</link>
    <description>The Court upheld the dismissal of the appeal by CESTAT, emphasizing that since the dropping of duty demand against one party was final, there was no valid grievance against dropping the penalty against another party involved in the same violation. The Court found no substantial legal question for consideration, leading to the appeal&#039;s dismissal without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72469" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (3) TMI 314 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33841</link>
      <description>The Court upheld the dismissal of the appeal by CESTAT, emphasizing that since the dropping of duty demand against one party was final, there was no valid grievance against dropping the penalty against another party involved in the same violation. The Court found no substantial legal question for consideration, leading to the appeal&#039;s dismissal without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33841</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>