<?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 (4) TMI 394 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77685</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the rejection of the refund claim as time-barred, citing Section 11B of the Central Excise Act and Supreme Court precedents. It emphasized that each party must independently pursue claims without relying on decisions in other cases. The appeal was dismissed, affirming that filing a refund claim based on another assessee&#039;s case is impermissible.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=115847" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (4) TMI 394 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77685</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the rejection of the refund claim as time-barred, citing Section 11B of the Central Excise Act and Supreme Court precedents. It emphasized that each party must independently pursue claims without relying on decisions in other cases. The appeal was dismissed, affirming that filing a refund claim based on another assessee&#039;s case is impermissible.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77685</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>