<?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>1991 (9) TMI 212 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81730</link>
    <description>In computing the six-month limitation for a refund claim under Section 11B, the day of payment of duty is excluded because time expressed as running &quot;from&quot; a specified date begins on the following day. The rule is consistent with Section 9 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, and reflects the same general method of computation referred to in Section 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963. On that basis, the refund claim was held to be within limitation and not time-barred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Sep 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:25:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=118875" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (9) TMI 212 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81730</link>
      <description>In computing the six-month limitation for a refund claim under Section 11B, the day of payment of duty is excluded because time expressed as running &quot;from&quot; a specified date begins on the following day. The rule is consistent with Section 9 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, and reflects the same general method of computation referred to in Section 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963. On that basis, the refund claim was held to be within limitation and not time-barred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Sep 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81730</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>