<?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 (5) TMI 1521 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360957</link>
    <description>The appeals against the dismissal of refund claims on limitation grounds under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act were remanded back to the original authority for disposal based on a Larger Bench decision clarifying the relevant date for refund claims filed quarterly. The judge aligned with the Larger Bench&#039;s ruling on the end of the quarter as the relevant date for refund claim consideration, emphasizing the need for consistency in determining the time limit for refund claims under the CENVAT Credit Rules.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 May 2018 07:50:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=521670" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (5) TMI 1521 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360957</link>
      <description>The appeals against the dismissal of refund claims on limitation grounds under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act were remanded back to the original authority for disposal based on a Larger Bench decision clarifying the relevant date for refund claims filed quarterly. The judge aligned with the Larger Bench&#039;s ruling on the end of the quarter as the relevant date for refund claim consideration, emphasizing the need for consistency in determining the time limit for refund claims under the CENVAT Credit Rules.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360957</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>