<?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 (10) TMI 766 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333746</link>
    <description>A refund claim must be examined on the basis of the amount actually maintained before the authority, and a voluntarily withdrawn portion cannot be insisted upon for adjudication absent a later revised claim. Here, the assessee filed a larger refund request, then reduced it by written communication and did not subsequently reinstate the withdrawn amount. The adjudicating authority therefore processed only the reduced claim as finally presented, and the notification could not be applied beyond that maintained claim. On that basis, adjudication of the balance withdrawn amount was unnecessary and the appeal was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 Feb 2017 10:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=445646" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (10) TMI 766 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333746</link>
      <description>A refund claim must be examined on the basis of the amount actually maintained before the authority, and a voluntarily withdrawn portion cannot be insisted upon for adjudication absent a later revised claim. Here, the assessee filed a larger refund request, then reduced it by written communication and did not subsequently reinstate the withdrawn amount. The adjudicating authority therefore processed only the reduced claim as finally presented, and the notification could not be applied beyond that maintained claim. On that basis, adjudication of the balance withdrawn amount was unnecessary and the appeal was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333746</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>