<?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>2012 (11) TMI 700 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218685</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal regarding the rejection of a refund claim for service tax paid on exported garments under Notification No. 41/2007-ST. The appellant&#039;s claim was deemed time-barred as it exceeded the 60-day limit specified in the notification, despite citing an amendment in Notification No. 32/2008-ST extending the period to 6 months. The Tribunal ruled that the amendment did not have retrospective effect, aligning with previous decisions, and concluded that the appellant&#039;s claim was invalid due to the timing constraints. The appeal was dismissed based on the interpretation of the limitation period under the notifications.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2014 14:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=192057" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (11) TMI 700 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218685</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal regarding the rejection of a refund claim for service tax paid on exported garments under Notification No. 41/2007-ST. The appellant&#039;s claim was deemed time-barred as it exceeded the 60-day limit specified in the notification, despite citing an amendment in Notification No. 32/2008-ST extending the period to 6 months. The Tribunal ruled that the amendment did not have retrospective effect, aligning with previous decisions, and concluded that the appellant&#039;s claim was invalid due to the timing constraints. The appeal was dismissed based on the interpretation of the limitation period under the notifications.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218685</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>