<?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 (8) TMI 1120 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347062</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities&#039; decision, rejecting the appeal due to the appellant&#039;s failure to meet the one-year limitation period from the date of export as mandated by Notification No. 41/2012-ST. The judgment emphasized the importance of complying with unambiguous notification provisions and statutory time limits, reiterating that the Tribunal cannot extend or condone delays in such cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Oct 2017 10:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=487100" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 1120 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347062</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities&#039; decision, rejecting the appeal due to the appellant&#039;s failure to meet the one-year limitation period from the date of export as mandated by Notification No. 41/2012-ST. The judgment emphasized the importance of complying with unambiguous notification provisions and statutory time limits, reiterating that the Tribunal cannot extend or condone delays in such cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347062</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>