<?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 (8) TMI 360 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48285</link>
    <description>The High Court set aside the tribunal&#039;s decision on the limitation period issue from April 2000 to October 2003, remanding the matter for a fresh inquiry due to lack of clear reasons provided by the tribunal. The Court emphasized the need for detailed reasoning and directed the Commissioner to consider both the limitation period and the rural area location issues comprehensively in a denovo enquiry for a just resolution.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Aug 2010 16:18:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=86792" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 360 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48285</link>
      <description>The High Court set aside the tribunal&#039;s decision on the limitation period issue from April 2000 to October 2003, remanding the matter for a fresh inquiry due to lack of clear reasons provided by the tribunal. The Court emphasized the need for detailed reasoning and directed the Commissioner to consider both the limitation period and the rural area location issues comprehensively in a denovo enquiry for a just resolution.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48285</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>