<?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 872 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334854</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the refund claims filed by the appellant for unutilized Cenvat credit were not time-barred under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Tribunal found that the claims were filed within the required time limit of one year from the end of the respective quarters, as mandated by the rule. Relying on relevant case laws, the Tribunal set aside the previous rejection of the claims and allowed the appeals, granting necessary relief to the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2016 13:49:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=448718" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 872 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334854</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the refund claims filed by the appellant for unutilized Cenvat credit were not time-barred under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Tribunal found that the claims were filed within the required time limit of one year from the end of the respective quarters, as mandated by the rule. Relying on relevant case laws, the Tribunal set aside the previous rejection of the claims and allowed the appeals, granting necessary relief to the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334854</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>