<?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>1989 (9) TMI 266 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80251</link>
    <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order rejecting the appellant&#039;s refund claim. It emphasized that the self-determination of duty by the assessee is provisional, not equivalent to an assessment of duty. The relevant date for the time limit under Section 11B is the date of payment of duty, not the adjustment in the PLA. The matter was remanded to the Assistant Collector for consideration on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Sep 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2011 16:34:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=117397" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (9) TMI 266 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80251</link>
      <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order rejecting the appellant&#039;s refund claim. It emphasized that the self-determination of duty by the assessee is provisional, not equivalent to an assessment of duty. The relevant date for the time limit under Section 11B is the date of payment of duty, not the adjustment in the PLA. The matter was remanded to the Assistant Collector for consideration on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Sep 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80251</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>