<?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>2016 (3) TMI 467 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325283</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed by the Member (Judicial), remanding the matter to the Original Adjudicating authority for processing the refund claim without considering the time bar aspect. The acknowledgment of the claim was deemed genuine, and the appellant&#039;s submission date was accepted based on evidence presented, directing a personal hearing and disposal within two months.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Jun 2021 10:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=420246" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 467 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325283</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed by the Member (Judicial), remanding the matter to the Original Adjudicating authority for processing the refund claim without considering the time bar aspect. The acknowledgment of the claim was deemed genuine, and the appellant&#039;s submission date was accepted based on evidence presented, directing a personal hearing and disposal within two months.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325283</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>