<?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 (11) TMI 795 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401040</link>
    <description>The Tribunal rejected the Revenue&#039;s application for rectification of mistake in the Final Order, emphasizing that the rejection of the refund claim was based on grounds not challenged by the appellant. The appellant&#039;s argument that the rejected amount from 2005 could not be contested now was upheld. The Tribunal noted the lack of proof of communication regarding the adjustment or rejection of the refund amount by the Revenue. Ultimately, the Tribunal found no mistake in the order issued on 29.01.2020 and deemed the rectification application meritless, stating that seeking a review of the order was impermissible in law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 May 2021 12:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=628643" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (11) TMI 795 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401040</link>
      <description>The Tribunal rejected the Revenue&#039;s application for rectification of mistake in the Final Order, emphasizing that the rejection of the refund claim was based on grounds not challenged by the appellant. The appellant&#039;s argument that the rejected amount from 2005 could not be contested now was upheld. The Tribunal noted the lack of proof of communication regarding the adjustment or rejection of the refund amount by the Revenue. Ultimately, the Tribunal found no mistake in the order issued on 29.01.2020 and deemed the rectification application meritless, stating that seeking a review of the order was impermissible in law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401040</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>