Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2007 (9) TMI 521

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e, for the Appellant. Shri K.J. Sanchis, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - After hearing both the sides duly represented by Shri S.J. Vyas, ld. Advocate and Shri K.J. Sanchis, JDR, we find that the demand raised against the appellant on the ground of valuation was dropped by the Asst. Commissioner vide his order dt. 27-2-1998, by observing that the duty ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The impugned order was passed by Asst. Commissioner on 27-2-1998. The review order in terms of the provisions of Section 35E was passed by the Commissioner on 3-3-1999 i.e. after one year from the date of passing of the order. Hence it has been contended that the same is barred by limitation. 3. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of CE v. M.M. Rubber Co. [1991 (55) E.L.T.....