<?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 1202 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392758</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the time limit under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 does not apply when the appellant is not liable to pay the tax. Therefore, the refund claim was not time-barred. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2020 09:46:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=605324" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 1202 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392758</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the time limit under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 does not apply when the appellant is not liable to pay the tax. Therefore, the refund claim was not time-barred. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392758</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>