<?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 1141 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344870</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal regarding a refund claim filed beyond the one-year limit under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. The appellant&#039;s argument that the one-year limitation should not apply to tax paid under a mistake of law was rejected. The Tribunal held that the case law cited by the appellant was inapplicable as the tax had been passed on, and the refund claim was also rejected on the ground of unjust enrichment, which the appellant did not contest.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Aug 2017 16:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=476429" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (6) TMI 1141 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344870</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal regarding a refund claim filed beyond the one-year limit under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. The appellant&#039;s argument that the one-year limitation should not apply to tax paid under a mistake of law was rejected. The Tribunal held that the case law cited by the appellant was inapplicable as the tax had been passed on, and the refund claim was also rejected on the ground of unjust enrichment, which the appellant did not contest.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344870</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>