<?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 (11) TMI 234 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387985</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, ruling that the Appellant was not entitled to interest on the refunded amount. The deposits made in 2003 and 2012 were in compliance with court orders, and the refund was processed promptly after the order in 2016, negating the need for interest payment under Section 35FF of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal found no intentional delay or negligence by the department, leading to the dismissal of the Appellant&#039;s claim for interest.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Nov 2019 08:33:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=593080" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (11) TMI 234 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387985</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, ruling that the Appellant was not entitled to interest on the refunded amount. The deposits made in 2003 and 2012 were in compliance with court orders, and the refund was processed promptly after the order in 2016, negating the need for interest payment under Section 35FF of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal found no intentional delay or negligence by the department, leading to the dismissal of the Appellant&#039;s claim for interest.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387985</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>