<?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 (7) TMI 633 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330035</link>
    <description>The appellate tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the impugned order that denied a refund claim for miscellaneous income of VAT and bank interest. It was established that the income was not subject to excise duty, and any payments made were deemed deposits, not duties. Consequently, the appellant was entitled to a refund, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2016 23:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=435107" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 633 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330035</link>
      <description>The appellate tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the impugned order that denied a refund claim for miscellaneous income of VAT and bank interest. It was established that the income was not subject to excise duty, and any payments made were deemed deposits, not duties. Consequently, the appellant was entitled to a refund, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330035</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>