<?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>2012 (6) TMI 926 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311087</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order by the Commissioner (Appeals), which upheld the rejection of a refund claim, due to a violation of natural justice principles. The appellant argued that only one hearing opportunity was provided and their adjournment request was ignored. The Tribunal found merit in this argument and remanded the case for a fresh decision by the Commissioner (Appeals), ensuring compliance with the previous remand order. The appeal was disposed of by remand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Dec 2023 12:12:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=734217" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (6) TMI 926 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311087</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order by the Commissioner (Appeals), which upheld the rejection of a refund claim, due to a violation of natural justice principles. The appellant argued that only one hearing opportunity was provided and their adjournment request was ignored. The Tribunal found merit in this argument and remanded the case for a fresh decision by the Commissioner (Appeals), ensuring compliance with the previous remand order. The appeal was disposed of by remand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311087</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>