<?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>2015 (7) TMI 1126 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185888</link>
    <description>Refund of excess central excise duty was claimed on the basis that invoices were revised after discounts were allowed to dealers. The appeals were treated as covered by an earlier common order in the connected batch, which had allowed similar refund claims on the same footing. Applying that consistent approach, the court disposed of the present matters in line with the earlier decision and allowed the refund claim in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Nov 2016 17:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=439762" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (7) TMI 1126 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185888</link>
      <description>Refund of excess central excise duty was claimed on the basis that invoices were revised after discounts were allowed to dealers. The appeals were treated as covered by an earlier common order in the connected batch, which had allowed similar refund claims on the same footing. Applying that consistent approach, the court disposed of the present matters in line with the earlier decision and allowed the refund claim in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185888</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>