<?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>2019 (1) TMI 718 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373553</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the decision that the refund claim was time-barred as the application was filed beyond the prescribed time limit under the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of adhering to statutory time limits for filing refund applications and highlighted the limitations on authorities to condone delays in such filings, especially in the context of specific enactments governing refund claims.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2019 09:13:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=553101" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 718 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373553</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the decision that the refund claim was time-barred as the application was filed beyond the prescribed time limit under the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of adhering to statutory time limits for filing refund applications and highlighted the limitations on authorities to condone delays in such filings, especially in the context of specific enactments governing refund claims.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373553</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>