<?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 (12) TMI 707 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352438</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the rejection of the appellant&#039;s refund claim, deeming it time-barred under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant&#039;s argument that provisional pricelists rendered the limitation period inapplicable was dismissed. Citing relevant case law, the Tribunal found in favor of the department, affirming that the claim was filed beyond the permissible timeframe. The appeal was consequently dismissed on 27.11.2017.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Dec 2017 08:37:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=499810" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 707 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352438</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the rejection of the appellant&#039;s refund claim, deeming it time-barred under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant&#039;s argument that provisional pricelists rendered the limitation period inapplicable was dismissed. Citing relevant case law, the Tribunal found in favor of the department, affirming that the claim was filed beyond the permissible timeframe. The appeal was consequently dismissed on 27.11.2017.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352438</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>