<?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>2001 (5) TMI 484 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97849</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT allowed the appeal, setting aside the order and remanding the case for re-determination by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal clarified that the refund claim was under Rule 96ZGG, not Rule 173S, and should not be subject to Section 11B provisions, contrary to the Commissioner&#039;s decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 12:56:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134906" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (5) TMI 484 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97849</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT allowed the appeal, setting aside the order and remanding the case for re-determination by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal clarified that the refund claim was under Rule 96ZGG, not Rule 173S, and should not be subject to Section 11B provisions, contrary to the Commissioner&#039;s decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97849</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>