<?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>2011 (5) TMI 125 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203896</link>
    <description>Payment under protest under Rule 233B may be established by a protest letter addressed to the Superintendent where the protest was clearly lodged; addressing it to the Assistant Collector was treated as a technical objection. Refund could therefore not be denied for lack of valid protest. Where original duty-paying documents and supporting records, including certificates, audited balance sheets, bank scrolls and proof of PLA deposit, required verification, the refund claim was remitted for fresh consideration after an opportunity to produce them. The common refund dispute was accepted in principle on the protest issue, with one claim granted and the documentary issue reconsidered on remand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2011 10:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=177445" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (5) TMI 125 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203896</link>
      <description>Payment under protest under Rule 233B may be established by a protest letter addressed to the Superintendent where the protest was clearly lodged; addressing it to the Assistant Collector was treated as a technical objection. Refund could therefore not be denied for lack of valid protest. Where original duty-paying documents and supporting records, including certificates, audited balance sheets, bank scrolls and proof of PLA deposit, required verification, the refund claim was remitted for fresh consideration after an opportunity to produce them. The common refund dispute was accepted in principle on the protest issue, with one claim granted and the documentary issue reconsidered on remand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203896</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>