<?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 (11) TMI 571 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334553</link>
    <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, stating that they are entitled to interest on delayed refunds from the date of the expiry of 3 months from the filing of the refund application. The tribunal emphasized that interest accrual commences after the specified timeline, irrespective of subsequent decisions by appellate authorities. The appellants are eligible for interest from the enactment date of Section 11 BB until the sanction of the refund. Therefore, the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2016 14:55:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=448086" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 571 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334553</link>
      <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, stating that they are entitled to interest on delayed refunds from the date of the expiry of 3 months from the filing of the refund application. The tribunal emphasized that interest accrual commences after the specified timeline, irrespective of subsequent decisions by appellate authorities. The appellants are eligible for interest from the enactment date of Section 11 BB until the sanction of the refund. Therefore, the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334553</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>