<?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 (6) TMI 308 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78934</link>
    <description>The appeals were remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for reconsideration due to the incorrect rejection of appeals for failure to file within the 60-day period prescribed by law for claiming a refund of service tax used in manufacturing goods for export. The Member (T) emphasized the need for proper verification of time limits, correct legal interpretation, and fair opportunities for parties to present their case in service tax matters under Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Dec 2010 15:25:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=117032" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (6) TMI 308 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78934</link>
      <description>The appeals were remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for reconsideration due to the incorrect rejection of appeals for failure to file within the 60-day period prescribed by law for claiming a refund of service tax used in manufacturing goods for export. The Member (T) emphasized the need for proper verification of time limits, correct legal interpretation, and fair opportunities for parties to present their case in service tax matters under Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78934</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>