<?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>2007 (2) TMI 446 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121133</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order declaring the claim time-barred. The appellant&#039;s reversal of credit during the appeal process, done under protest, was deemed justified as a consequential relief. The Tribunal held that the denial of credit was overturned by the Commissioner (Appeals) and upheld by the Tribunal, supporting the appellant&#039;s position. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the claim for refund of credit was accepted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2012 17:41:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=158127" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (2) TMI 446 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121133</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order declaring the claim time-barred. The appellant&#039;s reversal of credit during the appeal process, done under protest, was deemed justified as a consequential relief. The Tribunal held that the denial of credit was overturned by the Commissioner (Appeals) and upheld by the Tribunal, supporting the appellant&#039;s position. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the claim for refund of credit was accepted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121133</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>