<?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 (10) TMI 128 - MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413076</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal&#039;s order that the respondent was eligible for exemption under the notification and that the recovery of refunds under Section 11A was not justified. The court emphasized that the refund orders were unchallenged during the relevant period and found no substantial legal question. The appeal was dismissed, but the court left open the option for other lawful actions by the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2021 10:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=657552" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (10) TMI 128 - MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413076</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal&#039;s order that the respondent was eligible for exemption under the notification and that the recovery of refunds under Section 11A was not justified. The court emphasized that the refund orders were unchallenged during the relevant period and found no substantial legal question. The appeal was dismissed, but the court left open the option for other lawful actions by the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413076</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>