<?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>2006 (3) TMI 149 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47603</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court held that the amendment to Section 11A of the Finance Act, 2000 rendered a previous decision inapplicable. The Court set aside the Tribunal&#039;s decision to quash duty demands before the show cause notice based on the previous decision. However, if the respondent becomes liable for duty, they can claim any applicable exemptions. The Court confirmed the Tribunal&#039;s decision except for the duty recovery issue based on the previous decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Apr 2014 18:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=86121" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (3) TMI 149 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47603</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court held that the amendment to Section 11A of the Finance Act, 2000 rendered a previous decision inapplicable. The Court set aside the Tribunal&#039;s decision to quash duty demands before the show cause notice based on the previous decision. However, if the respondent becomes liable for duty, they can claim any applicable exemptions. The Court confirmed the Tribunal&#039;s decision except for the duty recovery issue based on the previous decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47603</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>