<?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 (11) TMI 463 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115774</link>
    <description>Refund cannot ordinarily be claimed without first challenging the assessment of the Bill of Entry and obtaining a favourable order. The document notes that the refund application was filed without assailing the assessment, contrary to the settled principle applied by CESTAT. On that basis, the Commissioner (Appeals) order was treated as inconsistent with the governing rule on refund eligibility, and its operation was stayed pending final disposal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 17:30:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152772" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (11) TMI 463 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115774</link>
      <description>Refund cannot ordinarily be claimed without first challenging the assessment of the Bill of Entry and obtaining a favourable order. The document notes that the refund application was filed without assailing the assessment, contrary to the settled principle applied by CESTAT. On that basis, the Commissioner (Appeals) order was treated as inconsistent with the governing rule on refund eligibility, and its operation was stayed pending final disposal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115774</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>