<?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 (9) TMI 177 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80856</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed, setting aside the order of the Collector, as the refund erroneously made could not be recovered due to procedural lapses. The judgment emphasized the importance of following the prescribed procedures under Section 35E(2) and Section 11A for effective recovery of an erroneous refund.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 17:22:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=118001" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (9) TMI 177 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80856</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed, setting aside the order of the Collector, as the refund erroneously made could not be recovered due to procedural lapses. The judgment emphasized the importance of following the prescribed procedures under Section 35E(2) and Section 11A for effective recovery of an erroneous refund.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80856</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>