<?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>2017 (2) TMI 1144 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339444</link>
    <description>The case involved issues of delay in filing duty drawback claims, jurisdiction of the Tribunal in drawback matters, and the maintainability of appeals related to payment of drawback. The Tribunal sought clarity on its jurisdiction in such cases due to conflicting decisions within. The judgment highlighted the need for a Larger Bench to decide on the legal question posed, emphasizing the lack of clarity in existing judgments on these matters.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Jan 2018 12:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=459821" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 1144 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339444</link>
      <description>The case involved issues of delay in filing duty drawback claims, jurisdiction of the Tribunal in drawback matters, and the maintainability of appeals related to payment of drawback. The Tribunal sought clarity on its jurisdiction in such cases due to conflicting decisions within. The judgment highlighted the need for a Larger Bench to decide on the legal question posed, emphasizing the lack of clarity in existing judgments on these matters.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339444</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>