<?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 (7) TMI 571 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382875</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision rejecting the appellant&#039;s refund claim for construction services provided to Government Departments during a period when the exemption was withdrawn and later reintroduced. The appellant&#039;s claim filed after the specified time limit under Section 102 of the Finance Act, 2016 was deemed invalid, emphasizing the importance of adhering to statutory time limits for claiming refunds, even in cases of disputed tax liability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Jul 2019 07:46:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=578987" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (7) TMI 571 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382875</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision rejecting the appellant&#039;s refund claim for construction services provided to Government Departments during a period when the exemption was withdrawn and later reintroduced. The appellant&#039;s claim filed after the specified time limit under Section 102 of the Finance Act, 2016 was deemed invalid, emphasizing the importance of adhering to statutory time limits for claiming refunds, even in cases of disputed tax liability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382875</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>