<?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 (9) TMI 333 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34240</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the demand raised beyond the normal period of limitation was time-barred, and only the demand within the normal period should be confirmed. Penalties imposed on the appellant and its commercial manager were set aside due to the absence of mala fide intent. The matter was remanded for recalculation of duty and interest within the normal limitation period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72866" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (9) TMI 333 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34240</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the demand raised beyond the normal period of limitation was time-barred, and only the demand within the normal period should be confirmed. Penalties imposed on the appellant and its commercial manager were set aside due to the absence of mala fide intent. The matter was remanded for recalculation of duty and interest within the normal limitation period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34240</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>