<?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>2010 (1) TMI 142 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75973</link>
    <description>Refund claims under Notification No. 41/2007-ST were examined on limitation, and a claim filed after the original 60-day period from 30.06.2008 had been rejected as time-barred. A later circular clarified the revised limitation position for refund claims relating to the relevant quarter and indicated that claims filed within the revised period could be considered if otherwise in order. Because the claim had not been assessed in light of that circular, the limitation question required fresh consideration by the adjudicating authority, together with the merits if the claim was found to be in time, after granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=114205" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (1) TMI 142 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75973</link>
      <description>Refund claims under Notification No. 41/2007-ST were examined on limitation, and a claim filed after the original 60-day period from 30.06.2008 had been rejected as time-barred. A later circular clarified the revised limitation position for refund claims relating to the relevant quarter and indicated that claims filed within the revised period could be considered if otherwise in order. Because the claim had not been assessed in light of that circular, the limitation question required fresh consideration by the adjudicating authority, together with the merits if the claim was found to be in time, after granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75973</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>