<?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>1988 (1) TMI 139 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73497</link>
    <description>Refund claims for post-manufacturing expense deductions cannot be rejected merely because no appeal was filed against earlier assessment communications where no appealable disallowance was actually made. The earlier superintendent&#039;s communication was only a procedural request for resubmission, and the later provisional assessment finalisation did not decide the deductibility issue. The claimed expense heads were admissible in principle under the governing Supreme Court rulings, provided they had been originally claimed, remained within the applicable ceiling limit, and were verified as to actual amounts. The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication of the refund claims in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Jan 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2011 13:31:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=111776" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (1) TMI 139 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73497</link>
      <description>Refund claims for post-manufacturing expense deductions cannot be rejected merely because no appeal was filed against earlier assessment communications where no appealable disallowance was actually made. The earlier superintendent&#039;s communication was only a procedural request for resubmission, and the later provisional assessment finalisation did not decide the deductibility issue. The claimed expense heads were admissible in principle under the governing Supreme Court rulings, provided they had been originally claimed, remained within the applicable ceiling limit, and were verified as to actual amounts. The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication of the refund claims in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Jan 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73497</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>