<?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 (4) TMI 1300 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359189</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding that the lower authorities misinterpreted Section 11 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant, a merchant exporter, claimed a rebate that was wrongly appropriated towards service tax dues of another entity. As the appellant had no dues, the Tribunal directed the lower authorities to refund the amount in cash, stating that the rebate should not have been appropriated based on Section 11.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2019 10:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=518048" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (4) TMI 1300 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359189</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding that the lower authorities misinterpreted Section 11 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant, a merchant exporter, claimed a rebate that was wrongly appropriated towards service tax dues of another entity. As the appellant had no dues, the Tribunal directed the lower authorities to refund the amount in cash, stating that the rebate should not have been appropriated based on Section 11.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359189</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>