<?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>1996 (1) TMI 127 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44210</link>
    <description>SC held that mere citation of an incorrect statutory provision does not automatically invalidate exercise of a power available under another provision. The Court found a clear error on the face of the Tribunal&#039;s order dated 23-6-1987 and held the Tribunal erred in rejecting the applicant&#039;s rectification application. Consequently, the Tribunal&#039;s order dated 21-12-1989 rejecting the Department&#039;s application was set aside. The appeal was disposed of.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2025 14:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=82739" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (1) TMI 127 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44210</link>
      <description>SC held that mere citation of an incorrect statutory provision does not automatically invalidate exercise of a power available under another provision. The Court found a clear error on the face of the Tribunal&#039;s order dated 23-6-1987 and held the Tribunal erred in rejecting the applicant&#039;s rectification application. Consequently, the Tribunal&#039;s order dated 21-12-1989 rejecting the Department&#039;s application was set aside. The appeal was disposed of.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44210</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>