1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Notice under Section 11A required for recovering erroneous refund after Section 35E review</h1> The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Mumbai, held that a notice under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act is necessary for recovering an erroneous refund after ... Demand for erroneous refund arising out of Review proceeding The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Mumbai, in the case of Faq Precision Bearing v. Commissioner and Rosemount India Ltd. v. Commissioner, held that a notice under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act is required for recovery of erroneous refund after review proceedings under Section 35E. The Tribunal followed the Supreme Court judgment in Collector v. Re-Rolling Mills, upholding the requirement of such notice within the prescribed time limit. The appeals were rejected based on this precedent.