<?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 (5) TMI 403 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119717</link>
    <description>Refund of unutilized deemed credit under the compounded levy and Cenvat credit scheme was held subject to the limitation period in Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 because Notification No. 11/2002-C.E. (N.T.) expressly incorporated that time limit. A claim filed beyond the prescribed period was therefore time-barred, and the rejection of refund on limitation was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Jul 2012 16:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156713" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (5) TMI 403 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119717</link>
      <description>Refund of unutilized deemed credit under the compounded levy and Cenvat credit scheme was held subject to the limitation period in Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 because Notification No. 11/2002-C.E. (N.T.) expressly incorporated that time limit. A claim filed beyond the prescribed period was therefore time-barred, and the rejection of refund on limitation was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119717</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>