<?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>2006 (1) TMI 300 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116924</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the revenue should have refunded the duties without the appellants having to apply for it, as they were entitled to a refund when show cause notices were dropped. The Tribunal emphasized the rightful refund of the deposited duties and ruled that the time bar did not apply in this case. The appeals related to the recovery of an erroneous refund were allowed, granting relief to the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Jun 2012 18:36:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153922" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (1) TMI 300 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116924</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the revenue should have refunded the duties without the appellants having to apply for it, as they were entitled to a refund when show cause notices were dropped. The Tribunal emphasized the rightful refund of the deposited duties and ruled that the time bar did not apply in this case. The appeals related to the recovery of an erroneous refund were allowed, granting relief to the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116924</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>