<?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 (9) TMI 246 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366510</link>
    <description>An appeal against a Commissioner (Appeals) order on rebate of central excise duty was held to be outside the Tribunal&#039;s appellate competence under the first proviso to Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal therefore declined jurisdiction over the rebate dispute and did not examine the merits of the sanction claim. The appeal was treated as not maintainable before the Tribunal and dismissed on that ground.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Sep 2018 07:46:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=533319" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 246 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366510</link>
      <description>An appeal against a Commissioner (Appeals) order on rebate of central excise duty was held to be outside the Tribunal&#039;s appellate competence under the first proviso to Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal therefore declined jurisdiction over the rebate dispute and did not examine the merits of the sanction claim. The appeal was treated as not maintainable before the Tribunal and dismissed on that ground.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366510</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>