<?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>2002 (3) TMI 529 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102391</link>
    <description>A sanctioned refund could not be withheld or adjusted against a demand that had already been set aside and was no longer in existence. Because the liability depended only on a possible future reconfirmation in de novo proceedings, it remained contingent and could not justify retaining the refund. The refund was therefore directed to be paid to the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 17:10:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139440" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (3) TMI 529 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102391</link>
      <description>A sanctioned refund could not be withheld or adjusted against a demand that had already been set aside and was no longer in existence. Because the liability depended only on a possible future reconfirmation in de novo proceedings, it remained contingent and could not justify retaining the refund. The refund was therefore directed to be paid to the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102391</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>