<?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>Confusion Over CESTAT&#039;s Decision on Refund Period Start Date Following Retrospective Excise Duty Amendment.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=22364</link>
    <description>Refund claim - retrospective amendment reducing rate of excise duty - The applications for refund were clearly within limitation. We do not understand the logic or rationale behind the order of the CESTAT counting the period from July, 1999 for which the excess amount was sought to be refunded - SC</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2015 09:45:14 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2015 09:45:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=380428" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Confusion Over CESTAT&#039;s Decision on Refund Period Start Date Following Retrospective Excise Duty Amendment.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=22364</link>
      <description>Refund claim - retrospective amendment reducing rate of excise duty - The applications for refund were clearly within limitation. We do not understand the logic or rationale behind the order of the CESTAT counting the period from July, 1999 for which the excess amount was sought to be refunded - SC</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2015 09:45:14 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=22364</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>