<?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>2013 (12) TMI 1739 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307204</link>
    <description>Filing of ARE-2 was a mandatory statutory condition for claiming duty rebate under the scheme, and non-filing disentitled the claimant from the benefit. The Madhya Pradesh HC followed its earlier Division Bench rulings holding the requirement to be settled law and found no reason to depart from that view, so the writ petition was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2023 11:12:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=708800" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (12) TMI 1739 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307204</link>
      <description>Filing of ARE-2 was a mandatory statutory condition for claiming duty rebate under the scheme, and non-filing disentitled the claimant from the benefit. The Madhya Pradesh HC followed its earlier Division Bench rulings holding the requirement to be settled law and found no reason to depart from that view, so the writ petition was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307204</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>