<?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>2015 (11) TMI 1656 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191403</link>
    <description>The Rajasthan High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned orders, and declared the petitioner entitled to the rebate under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The court relied on a Supreme Court decision, emphasizing exporters&#039; entitlement to both types of rebates under Rule 18. This case highlights the significance of legal precedents and correct interpretation of statutory provisions in resolving rebate claim disputes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Apr 2017 18:49:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=463857" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (11) TMI 1656 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191403</link>
      <description>The Rajasthan High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned orders, and declared the petitioner entitled to the rebate under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The court relied on a Supreme Court decision, emphasizing exporters&#039; entitlement to both types of rebates under Rule 18. This case highlights the significance of legal precedents and correct interpretation of statutory provisions in resolving rebate claim disputes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191403</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>