<?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 (7) TMI 1218 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410376</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that the refund claim was not time-barred under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. The Tribunal found that the deposit made under protest was not subject to the one-year limitation and that the refund application was filed within a reasonable period after the Tribunal&#039;s final decision. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the Adjudicating Authority&#039;s order and allowed the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Jan 2022 13:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=651211" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (7) TMI 1218 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410376</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that the refund claim was not time-barred under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. The Tribunal found that the deposit made under protest was not subject to the one-year limitation and that the refund application was filed within a reasonable period after the Tribunal&#039;s final decision. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the Adjudicating Authority&#039;s order and allowed the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410376</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>