<?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>1985 (4) TMI 201 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91976</link>
    <description>Where an exemption notification required a base-year declaration and departmental approval before the benefit could be taken, the refund or exemption claim was treated as made when the declaration was submitted for approval, and limitation ran only up to that date. On that basis, the refund claim was held to be within time under Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The objection that the assessee had not disputed the classification list was also rejected, because the prescribed declaration-and-approval procedure, rather than the classification list, governed availment of the exemption. The refund claim was therefore maintainable and not barred by limitation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Oct 2011 12:38:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129037" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (4) TMI 201 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91976</link>
      <description>Where an exemption notification required a base-year declaration and departmental approval before the benefit could be taken, the refund or exemption claim was treated as made when the declaration was submitted for approval, and limitation ran only up to that date. On that basis, the refund claim was held to be within time under Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The objection that the assessee had not disputed the classification list was also rejected, because the prescribed declaration-and-approval procedure, rather than the classification list, governed availment of the exemption. The refund claim was therefore maintainable and not barred by limitation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91976</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>