<?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>2009 (12) TMI 341 - CESTAT,  AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77328</link>
    <description>Delay in filing an application for fixation of drawback brand rate beyond the prescribed 60-day period may be condoned where the delay is explained by financial difficulty and a misunderstanding about the need for the EP copy, especially when a circular indicates a liberal approach to such applications. On those facts, the refusal to condone delay was set aside, the delay was directed to be condoned, and the application was required to be reconsidered by the Commissioner.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=115498" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (12) TMI 341 - CESTAT,  AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77328</link>
      <description>Delay in filing an application for fixation of drawback brand rate beyond the prescribed 60-day period may be condoned where the delay is explained by financial difficulty and a misunderstanding about the need for the EP copy, especially when a circular indicates a liberal approach to such applications. On those facts, the refusal to condone delay was set aside, the delay was directed to be condoned, and the application was required to be reconsidered by the Commissioner.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77328</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>