<?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>1994 (7) TMI 174 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83399</link>
    <description>Where RT 12 returns were assessed in accordance with an approved classification list and the assessed duty was lower than the duty paid, Rule 173-I(2) entitled the assessee to credit the excess duty in the account current. The rule was treated as distinct from a refund claim under Section 11B and was held not to be limited to clerical errors or dependent on any express direction in the assessment memorandum. On that basis, the challenge to the assessee&#039;s suo motu credit failed, and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Jul 2011 12:12:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=120544" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (7) TMI 174 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83399</link>
      <description>Where RT 12 returns were assessed in accordance with an approved classification list and the assessed duty was lower than the duty paid, Rule 173-I(2) entitled the assessee to credit the excess duty in the account current. The rule was treated as distinct from a refund claim under Section 11B and was held not to be limited to clerical errors or dependent on any express direction in the assessment memorandum. On that basis, the challenge to the assessee&#039;s suo motu credit failed, and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83399</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>