<?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 1581 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281474</link>
    <description>An order rejecting a claim must disclose clear reasons dealing with the material issues, including the nature of the rebate claimed, the basis of any alleged double benefit, and why the claim is said to be inadmissible. A bare rejection based only on basic facts is unsustainable where the reasoning is absent or inadequate. As the record also left factual issues unresolved, the matter was appropriately remanded for fresh consideration and determination by the Tribunal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2019 15:23:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=575819" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 1581 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281474</link>
      <description>An order rejecting a claim must disclose clear reasons dealing with the material issues, including the nature of the rebate claimed, the basis of any alleged double benefit, and why the claim is said to be inadmissible. A bare rejection based only on basic facts is unsustainable where the reasoning is absent or inadequate. As the record also left factual issues unresolved, the matter was appropriately remanded for fresh consideration and determination by the Tribunal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281474</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>