<?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>2004 (12) TMI 459 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114826</link>
    <description>Refund could not be claimed on the basis of a favourable order in another assessee&#039;s case when the denial of an exemption notification in the respondent&#039;s own classification declaration had never been challenged. The settled principle applied was that an assessee must succeed or fail in its own proceedings, and an unchallenged order attains finality and remains binding in that assessee&#039;s case. A refund application cannot be used to indirectly question the correctness of such an order. On that basis, the refund claim was held not maintainable and the denial of exemption in the respondent&#039;s own case continued to bind, with the Revenue succeeding.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 14:43:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151825" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (12) TMI 459 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114826</link>
      <description>Refund could not be claimed on the basis of a favourable order in another assessee&#039;s case when the denial of an exemption notification in the respondent&#039;s own classification declaration had never been challenged. The settled principle applied was that an assessee must succeed or fail in its own proceedings, and an unchallenged order attains finality and remains binding in that assessee&#039;s case. A refund application cannot be used to indirectly question the correctness of such an order. On that basis, the refund claim was held not maintainable and the denial of exemption in the respondent&#039;s own case continued to bind, with the Revenue succeeding.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114826</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>