<?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>2014 (11) TMI 365 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253048</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, citing the relevant provisions of the Central Excise Act and remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration in accordance with the applicable rule. The denial of duty drawback claim was addressed, the maintainability of the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal was confirmed, and the application of Rule 6 instead of Rule 7 for duty drawback claims was rectified in favor of the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2015 11:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=368607" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (11) TMI 365 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253048</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, citing the relevant provisions of the Central Excise Act and remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration in accordance with the applicable rule. The denial of duty drawback claim was addressed, the maintainability of the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal was confirmed, and the application of Rule 6 instead of Rule 7 for duty drawback claims was rectified in favor of the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253048</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>