<?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 (10) TMI 469 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368503</link>
    <description>Erroneous refund recovery under the Central Excise Act requires initiation by a show cause notice under Section 11A within the prescribed limitation period. The Tribunal noted that an order under Section 35E(2) does not by itself effect recovery of a refunded amount, and that the statutory scheme, including Section 35A, contemplates notice-based proceedings before recovery can be sustained. The dispute involved an alleged erroneous refund linked to CENVAT credit, interest and penalty, but the governing legal position was treated as settled by prior Tribunal authority and the Board circular. In the absence of a timely Section 11A notice, the demand and recovery were held unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2018 11:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=537680" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 469 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368503</link>
      <description>Erroneous refund recovery under the Central Excise Act requires initiation by a show cause notice under Section 11A within the prescribed limitation period. The Tribunal noted that an order under Section 35E(2) does not by itself effect recovery of a refunded amount, and that the statutory scheme, including Section 35A, contemplates notice-based proceedings before recovery can be sustained. The dispute involved an alleged erroneous refund linked to CENVAT credit, interest and penalty, but the governing legal position was treated as settled by prior Tribunal authority and the Board circular. In the absence of a timely Section 11A notice, the demand and recovery were held unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368503</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>