<?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>2021 (6) TMI 952 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409056</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowed the appeal, and directed the Adjudicating Authority to grant the refund with applicable interest at 12% per annum. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of proof of delivery for the commencement of the limitation period and recognized the duty payment under protest, exempting the appellant from the one-year limitation period for refund claims.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2022 11:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=648019" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (6) TMI 952 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409056</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowed the appeal, and directed the Adjudicating Authority to grant the refund with applicable interest at 12% per annum. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of proof of delivery for the commencement of the limitation period and recognized the duty payment under protest, exempting the appellant from the one-year limitation period for refund claims.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409056</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>