<?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>2024 (11) TMI 119 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761133</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order that rejected a refund claim under Notification No.56/2002-CE due to alleged violations. It emphasized that the refund could not be denied if the refund sanction order was unchallenged, citing precedents and legal principles. The Tribunal granted consequential relief, underscoring the necessity of adhering to established legal precedents and challenging refund sanction orders prior to recovery attempts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Nov 2024 18:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=776667" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (11) TMI 119 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761133</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order that rejected a refund claim under Notification No.56/2002-CE due to alleged violations. It emphasized that the refund could not be denied if the refund sanction order was unchallenged, citing precedents and legal principles. The Tribunal granted consequential relief, underscoring the necessity of adhering to established legal precedents and challenging refund sanction orders prior to recovery attempts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761133</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>