<?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>2008 (7) TMI 808 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124729</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the decision rejecting the refund claim based on time bar and remanded the matter for further consideration. It emphasized the connection between the application under Section 23(2) of the Customs Act and the refund claim, stating that the refund claim could not be decided until the application was resolved. The Tribunal directed the Adjudicating Authority to first address the pending application under Section 23(2) before considering the refund claim, allowing the appeal by way of remand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Oct 2012 16:54:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=161673" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (7) TMI 808 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124729</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the decision rejecting the refund claim based on time bar and remanded the matter for further consideration. It emphasized the connection between the application under Section 23(2) of the Customs Act and the refund claim, stating that the refund claim could not be decided until the application was resolved. The Tribunal directed the Adjudicating Authority to first address the pending application under Section 23(2) before considering the refund claim, allowing the appeal by way of remand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124729</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>