<?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>2018 (2) TMI 1447 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356026</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, dismissing the appeal due to the time-barred nature of the refund claim under Section 11 B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Despite the appellant&#039;s arguments and citing of judgments, the Tribunal emphasized adherence to statutory provisions, especially time limits for refund claims, as supported by Supreme Court precedents. The authorities are bound by such provisions, leading to the rejection of the refund claim in this case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Feb 2018 06:02:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=510093" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 1447 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356026</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, dismissing the appeal due to the time-barred nature of the refund claim under Section 11 B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Despite the appellant&#039;s arguments and citing of judgments, the Tribunal emphasized adherence to statutory provisions, especially time limits for refund claims, as supported by Supreme Court precedents. The authorities are bound by such provisions, leading to the rejection of the refund claim in this case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356026</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>