<?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 (3) TMI 172 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339669</link>
    <description>The judgment favored the assessee by upholding the dropping of the demand on limitation and granting the refund claim. The decision highlighted the importance of maintaining proper records and submitting them to the department to avoid allegations of suppression of facts. The judgment also emphasized the need for consistency in appeal decisions and the legality of refund sanctions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Mar 2017 15:13:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=460310" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 172 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339669</link>
      <description>The judgment favored the assessee by upholding the dropping of the demand on limitation and granting the refund claim. The decision highlighted the importance of maintaining proper records and submitting them to the department to avoid allegations of suppression of facts. The judgment also emphasized the need for consistency in appeal decisions and the legality of refund sanctions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339669</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>