<?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>2007 (10) TMI 46 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2946</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the encashed amount from bank guarantees did not constitute duty, making time bar provisions inapplicable to the refund claim. Relying on legal precedents, the Tribunal reinstated the refund granted by the original authority, overturning the Commissioner (Appeals) decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=42299" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (10) TMI 46 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2946</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the encashed amount from bank guarantees did not constitute duty, making time bar provisions inapplicable to the refund claim. Relying on legal precedents, the Tribunal reinstated the refund granted by the original authority, overturning the Commissioner (Appeals) decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2946</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>