<?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>2023 (1) TMI 395 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432648</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner&#039;s decision to reject the refund claims as untimely. It held that the claims were filed within the statutory time limit after excluding the period during which the necessary documents were seized by the Customs Department. The Tribunal directed further processing of the refund claims, emphasizing the exclusion of the seizure period from the limitation calculation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2023 08:42:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=701272" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (1) TMI 395 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432648</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner&#039;s decision to reject the refund claims as untimely. It held that the claims were filed within the statutory time limit after excluding the period during which the necessary documents were seized by the Customs Department. The Tribunal directed further processing of the refund claims, emphasizing the exclusion of the seizure period from the limitation calculation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432648</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>