<?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 (6) TMI 711 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344440</link>
    <description>Refund or re-credit of Terminal Excise Duty on deemed export supplies to 100% EOUs was held not maintainable before Central Excise authorities because the Foreign Trade Policy provided the governing refund mechanism. The authorities were therefore right to reject the claim, as the proper forum for such refund relief lay with the DGFT under the policy framework, not with Central Excise. The impugned order was sustained and the appeal failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Jun 2017 11:06:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=472522" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (6) TMI 711 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344440</link>
      <description>Refund or re-credit of Terminal Excise Duty on deemed export supplies to 100% EOUs was held not maintainable before Central Excise authorities because the Foreign Trade Policy provided the governing refund mechanism. The authorities were therefore right to reject the claim, as the proper forum for such refund relief lay with the DGFT under the policy framework, not with Central Excise. The impugned order was sustained and the appeal failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344440</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>