<?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 907 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383211</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the order denying refund under Section 104 of the Finance Act, 2017, and directed the Adjudicating Authority to determine if the refund application complied with the time-limit under Section 11B. If so, the refund was to be granted with consequential benefits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2020 16:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=579981" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (7) TMI 907 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383211</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the order denying refund under Section 104 of the Finance Act, 2017, and directed the Adjudicating Authority to determine if the refund application complied with the time-limit under Section 11B. If so, the refund was to be granted with consequential benefits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383211</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>