<?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>2024 (5) TMI 1579 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462315</link>
    <description>Tribunal rejected the Appellant&#039;s rectification application challenging a tax liability order. The court found no apparent error in the original ruling, determining that the Appellant had accepted tax liability through payment and show-cause notice responses. The Tribunal upheld its previous decision, ruling that the appropriate remedy was to file an appeal with the SC, not seek rectification. No Larger Bench reference was deemed necessary.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2025 18:57:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=828143" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (5) TMI 1579 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462315</link>
      <description>Tribunal rejected the Appellant&#039;s rectification application challenging a tax liability order. The court found no apparent error in the original ruling, determining that the Appellant had accepted tax liability through payment and show-cause notice responses. The Tribunal upheld its previous decision, ruling that the appropriate remedy was to file an appeal with the SC, not seek rectification. No Larger Bench reference was deemed necessary.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462315</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>