<?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 1079 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173525</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by M/s. Associated Aluminium Industries Pvt. Ltd. regarding the rejection of their refund claim for GTA services used in exporting goods under Notification No. 41/2007-S.T. The claim was considered time-barred as it was filed after the six-month period specified in the notification, despite arguments about the one-year time limit under a subsequent amendment. The Tribunal upheld the rejection of the appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2015 13:01:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=397736" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (11) TMI 1079 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173525</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by M/s. Associated Aluminium Industries Pvt. Ltd. regarding the rejection of their refund claim for GTA services used in exporting goods under Notification No. 41/2007-S.T. The claim was considered time-barred as it was filed after the six-month period specified in the notification, despite arguments about the one-year time limit under a subsequent amendment. The Tribunal upheld the rejection of the appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173525</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>