<?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 (7) TMI 1186 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363878</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, ruling in favor of the respondent and rejecting the Revenue&#039;s appeal based on the valid deposit of duty in the second account belonging to the same assessee. The Tribunal found that the money deposited in the second account ultimately reached the Exchequer, supporting the validity of the deposit despite the initial error.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2018 14:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=527604" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 1186 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363878</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, ruling in favor of the respondent and rejecting the Revenue&#039;s appeal based on the valid deposit of duty in the second account belonging to the same assessee. The Tribunal found that the money deposited in the second account ultimately reached the Exchequer, supporting the validity of the deposit despite the initial error.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363878</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>