<?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>2017 (1) TMI 1609 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274519</link>
    <description>Where drawback is claimed on exports, the corresponding exemption notification cannot be invoked to obtain a simultaneous refund benefit for the same transaction. The Tribunal followed its earlier view in the appellant&#039;s own case that the exemption notification was inapplicable once drawback under the Drawback Rules had been availed. On that basis, the claim for concurrent refund and drawback was held unsustainable, and the appeals were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 Aug 2018 11:45:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=531213" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 1609 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274519</link>
      <description>Where drawback is claimed on exports, the corresponding exemption notification cannot be invoked to obtain a simultaneous refund benefit for the same transaction. The Tribunal followed its earlier view in the appellant&#039;s own case that the exemption notification was inapplicable once drawback under the Drawback Rules had been availed. On that basis, the claim for concurrent refund and drawback was held unsustainable, and the appeals were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274519</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>