<?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>2013 (11) TMI 1574 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173573</link>
    <description>A refund claim first presented before the wrong authority and later refiled before the competent authority was held not to be time-barred merely because the proper filing occurred after the normal limitation period. The operative date for limitation was the original presentation before the authority lacking jurisdiction, since the claim had been returned only for presentation to the correct authority. An earlier Tribunal ruling on identical facts was followed, and that principle was applied in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2015 13:01:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=397745" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (11) TMI 1574 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173573</link>
      <description>A refund claim first presented before the wrong authority and later refiled before the competent authority was held not to be time-barred merely because the proper filing occurred after the normal limitation period. The operative date for limitation was the original presentation before the authority lacking jurisdiction, since the claim had been returned only for presentation to the correct authority. An earlier Tribunal ruling on identical facts was followed, and that principle was applied in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173573</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>