<?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 (12) TMI 147 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401348</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled that the appellant was entitled to a refund of the pre-deposit amount but not to any interest on the delayed refund. The appeal was dismissed as the refund was processed within the prescribed period from the date of the appellate order. The judgment highlighted adherence to statutory provisions under Section 35FF and the timelines for processing refunds to ascertain interest eligibility.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2020 13:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=629426" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (12) TMI 147 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401348</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled that the appellant was entitled to a refund of the pre-deposit amount but not to any interest on the delayed refund. The appeal was dismissed as the refund was processed within the prescribed period from the date of the appellate order. The judgment highlighted adherence to statutory provisions under Section 35FF and the timelines for processing refunds to ascertain interest eligibility.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401348</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>