<?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 (6) TMI 989 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362162</link>
    <description>A miscellaneous application sought rectification of a final CESTAT order on the ground that the refund dispute fell outside the original litigation policy circular. The respondent relied on the later circular dated 04.04.2018, which expressly brought refund matters within the policy, and the Revenue did not dispute that coverage. On that basis, the Tribunal accepted that the later circular applied, but held the rectification application not maintainable and dismissed it.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Jun 2018 06:21:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=524268" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (6) TMI 989 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362162</link>
      <description>A miscellaneous application sought rectification of a final CESTAT order on the ground that the refund dispute fell outside the original litigation policy circular. The respondent relied on the later circular dated 04.04.2018, which expressly brought refund matters within the policy, and the Revenue did not dispute that coverage. On that basis, the Tribunal accepted that the later circular applied, but held the rectification application not maintainable and dismissed it.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362162</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>