<?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>1990 (1) TMI 203 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80477</link>
    <description>The appeal was dismissed as the refund claim was filed beyond the specified time limit under Sec. 11B of the Central Excises &amp;amp; Salt Act. The Tribunal held that a mere endorsement on the RT-12 return without a proper refund claim or protest does not extend the limitation period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jan 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2011 11:57:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=117623" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (1) TMI 203 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80477</link>
      <description>The appeal was dismissed as the refund claim was filed beyond the specified time limit under Sec. 11B of the Central Excises &amp;amp; Salt Act. The Tribunal held that a mere endorsement on the RT-12 return without a proper refund claim or protest does not extend the limitation period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jan 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80477</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>