<?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 1042 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433295</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order, and directed the Adjudicating Authority to grant the refund within 45 days from the date of the order, along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The Tribunal found that the lower court erred in rejecting the refund claim based on limitation, highlighting the oversight of transitory provisions under the CGST Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2023 08:31:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=702786" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (1) TMI 1042 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433295</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order, and directed the Adjudicating Authority to grant the refund within 45 days from the date of the order, along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The Tribunal found that the lower court erred in rejecting the refund claim based on limitation, highlighting the oversight of transitory provisions under the CGST Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433295</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>