<?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>Appellate Tribunal rules pre-deposit payment not excess duty, grants refund u/s 35F, bypassing Section 11B limits.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=76755</link>
    <description>Recovery of erroneous refund - amount paid by the appellant’s Chennai Unit towards the pre-deposit in connection with an appeal filed arising out of order in Tuticorin Central Excise Division with a different Registration Number - The Appellate Tribunal finds that the payment made by the appellant towards pre-deposit for filing the appeal should indeed be considered a pre-deposit and not an excess payment of duty. This conclusion is supported by legal precedents and the purpose for which the payment was made. The Tribunal agrees with the appellant&#039;s argument that since the payment was made as a pre-deposit under Section 35F, the provisions of Section 11B regarding limitation should not apply. As a result, the Tribunal allowed the appeal and granted the company the refund of the pre-deposit amount.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 20 Apr 2024 08:44:29 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Apr 2024 08:44:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=750584" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Appellate Tribunal rules pre-deposit payment not excess duty, grants refund u/s 35F, bypassing Section 11B limits.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=76755</link>
      <description>Recovery of erroneous refund - amount paid by the appellant’s Chennai Unit towards the pre-deposit in connection with an appeal filed arising out of order in Tuticorin Central Excise Division with a different Registration Number - The Appellate Tribunal finds that the payment made by the appellant towards pre-deposit for filing the appeal should indeed be considered a pre-deposit and not an excess payment of duty. This conclusion is supported by legal precedents and the purpose for which the payment was made. The Tribunal agrees with the appellant&#039;s argument that since the payment was made as a pre-deposit under Section 35F, the provisions of Section 11B regarding limitation should not apply. As a result, the Tribunal allowed the appeal and granted the company the refund of the pre-deposit amount.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 20 Apr 2024 08:44:29 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=76755</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>