<?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 (1) TMI 1192 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189072</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the rejection of the refund claim for tax paid on services used in exporting iron ore fines, citing failure to consider crucial aspects and lack of communication response. The appellant&#039;s inability to meet deadlines due to delayed service tax code allotment was highlighted, leading to a remand for fresh consideration by the original authority, emphasizing a comprehensive review of the refund application.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Dec 2016 15:41:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=453040" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (1) TMI 1192 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189072</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the rejection of the refund claim for tax paid on services used in exporting iron ore fines, citing failure to consider crucial aspects and lack of communication response. The appellant&#039;s inability to meet deadlines due to delayed service tax code allotment was highlighted, leading to a remand for fresh consideration by the original authority, emphasizing a comprehensive review of the refund application.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189072</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>