<?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 1054 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392610</link>
    <description>The appeal was filed by the assessee against the rejection of a refund of Rs. 2,00,000. The Member (Judicial) considered the arguments and referred to a case law where it was held that the refund claim was not time-barred as it was filed within the permissible period under Section 11B. Consequently, the impugned order denying the refund on the ground of limitation was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with any consequential benefits as per law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Feb 2020 05:48:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=604985" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 1054 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392610</link>
      <description>The appeal was filed by the assessee against the rejection of a refund of Rs. 2,00,000. The Member (Judicial) considered the arguments and referred to a case law where it was held that the refund claim was not time-barred as it was filed within the permissible period under Section 11B. Consequently, the impugned order denying the refund on the ground of limitation was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with any consequential benefits as per law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392610</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>