<?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 (9) TMI 496 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412151</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order under challenge. It held that Section 11B of the Central Excise Act did not apply to the penalty amount refund claim. The delay in filing the refund claim was deemed within the prescribed time limit from the final order allowing the refund. The Tribunal found that the rejection based on delay and the 10-year delay in the refund claim were unjustified and beyond the scope of the Show Cause Notice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Sep 2021 09:56:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=655454" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (9) TMI 496 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412151</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order under challenge. It held that Section 11B of the Central Excise Act did not apply to the penalty amount refund claim. The delay in filing the refund claim was deemed within the prescribed time limit from the final order allowing the refund. The Tribunal found that the rejection based on delay and the 10-year delay in the refund claim were unjustified and beyond the scope of the Show Cause Notice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412151</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>