<?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>2015 (3) TMI 118 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257182</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that the delay in refunding the pre-deposit amount of Rs. 1 lakh, following the final order where the penalty was dropped, was unjustified. Despite no appeal or stay, the amount was withheld for over two years, causing harassment to the applicant. The Tribunal directed the Commissioner to resolve the claim promptly within a month, emphasizing the importance of timely refund post-Tribunal orders and the need for authorities to efficiently handle such applications to prevent undue delays or denials.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2015 05:56:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=377934" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (3) TMI 118 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257182</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that the delay in refunding the pre-deposit amount of Rs. 1 lakh, following the final order where the penalty was dropped, was unjustified. Despite no appeal or stay, the amount was withheld for over two years, causing harassment to the applicant. The Tribunal directed the Commissioner to resolve the claim promptly within a month, emphasizing the importance of timely refund post-Tribunal orders and the need for authorities to efficiently handle such applications to prevent undue delays or denials.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257182</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>