<?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>2003 (7) TMI 555 - CESTAT,  MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109588</link>
    <description>Rule 173L refund relief under excise law is available only when its substantive conditions are strictly met, because duty attaches to manufacture and the rule operates as a limited exception. The requirement that the value of returned goods at the time of return must not be less than the duty originally paid is not procedural but a mandatory prerequisite. As that condition was not established, the refund claim could not be sustained and the rejection of the refund was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2012 18:26:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=146605" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (7) TMI 555 - CESTAT,  MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109588</link>
      <description>Rule 173L refund relief under excise law is available only when its substantive conditions are strictly met, because duty attaches to manufacture and the rule operates as a limited exception. The requirement that the value of returned goods at the time of return must not be less than the duty originally paid is not procedural but a mandatory prerequisite. As that condition was not established, the refund claim could not be sustained and the rejection of the refund was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109588</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>