<?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>2020 (1) TMI 1095 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391482</link>
    <description>Amounts paid under protest towards alleged wrongful CENVAT credit cannot be finally retained or appropriated without a timely show cause notice and compliance with the statutory recovery process. Where the department sought recovery after the limitation period had expired, and the record showed that the debit was made under protest, the later correspondence did not erase that protest or cure the missing notice. The refund claim was therefore admissible, and rejection of the refund was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2020 15:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=601817" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (1) TMI 1095 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391482</link>
      <description>Amounts paid under protest towards alleged wrongful CENVAT credit cannot be finally retained or appropriated without a timely show cause notice and compliance with the statutory recovery process. Where the department sought recovery after the limitation period had expired, and the record showed that the debit was made under protest, the later correspondence did not erase that protest or cure the missing notice. The refund claim was therefore admissible, and rejection of the refund was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391482</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>