<?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>2022 (2) TMI 1170 - TRIPURA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418919</link>
    <description>The SC addressed the limitation period for service tax refund claims under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. The court held that refund claims arising from mistaken payments are not barred by the one-year limitation period. Relying on precedent in KVR Construction, the SC ruled that payments made by mistake do not constitute valid duty, and thus refund claims remain maintainable beyond the standard limitation timeframe.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 May 2025 18:44:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=671435" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (2) TMI 1170 - TRIPURA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418919</link>
      <description>The SC addressed the limitation period for service tax refund claims under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. The court held that refund claims arising from mistaken payments are not barred by the one-year limitation period. Relying on precedent in KVR Construction, the SC ruled that payments made by mistake do not constitute valid duty, and thus refund claims remain maintainable beyond the standard limitation timeframe.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418919</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>