<?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 (12) TMI 935 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246713</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that adjusting the rebate claim against premature demands was not sustainable. The decision was based on the unsettled nature of the demands and the stay order issued by the Hon&#039;ble High Court of Bombay. The Tribunal set aside the adjustment, directing the adjudicating authority to issue the rebate/refund claim within 15 days, in line with precedents from other High Courts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 20 Apr 2014 16:43:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=353334" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (12) TMI 935 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246713</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that adjusting the rebate claim against premature demands was not sustainable. The decision was based on the unsettled nature of the demands and the stay order issued by the Hon&#039;ble High Court of Bombay. The Tribunal set aside the adjustment, directing the adjudicating authority to issue the rebate/refund claim within 15 days, in line with precedents from other High Courts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246713</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>