<?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 (4) TMI 84 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377640</link>
    <description>The appeal related to the refund claim rejection based on payments made during investigation was dismissed due to being time-barred under Section 11B. However, the appeal concerning the classification of products for excise duty purposes was remanded for further consideration on the classification issue. The judgment emphasized adherence to statutory provisions for refund claims and the significance of classification disputes in excise duty matters.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2019 07:26:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=565145" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 84 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377640</link>
      <description>The appeal related to the refund claim rejection based on payments made during investigation was dismissed due to being time-barred under Section 11B. However, the appeal concerning the classification of products for excise duty purposes was remanded for further consideration on the classification issue. The judgment emphasized adherence to statutory provisions for refund claims and the significance of classification disputes in excise duty matters.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377640</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>