<?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 (2) TMI 44 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391600</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, dismissing the appellant&#039;s appeal regarding a refund claim for service tax paid under mistake of fact/law. It was held that the limitation period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act applied to refund claims, emphasizing that the statutory time limit could not be extended. The decision was based on established legal principles and a previous ruling by the Bombay High Court, affirming the dismissal of the appeal on 27/01/2020.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Feb 2020 11:08:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=602446" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 44 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391600</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, dismissing the appellant&#039;s appeal regarding a refund claim for service tax paid under mistake of fact/law. It was held that the limitation period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act applied to refund claims, emphasizing that the statutory time limit could not be extended. The decision was based on established legal principles and a previous ruling by the Bombay High Court, affirming the dismissal of the appeal on 27/01/2020.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391600</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>