<?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>2003 (8) TMI 55 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46706</link>
    <description>The right to rebate accrues on export under Rule 12, while Section 11B of the Central Excise Act governs the time for invoking that remedy. An amendment extending the limitation period from six months to one year was treated as procedural and capable of applying to pending or antecedent rebate claims within the enlarged period. Failure to file within the earlier six-month period did not extinguish the substantive rebate right, and the amendment did not impair any vested right of the Revenue. Section 6 of the General Clauses Act did not require a different result. The rejection of the rebate claims as time-barred was therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Jul 2024 17:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=85226" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (8) TMI 55 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46706</link>
      <description>The right to rebate accrues on export under Rule 12, while Section 11B of the Central Excise Act governs the time for invoking that remedy. An amendment extending the limitation period from six months to one year was treated as procedural and capable of applying to pending or antecedent rebate claims within the enlarged period. Failure to file within the earlier six-month period did not extinguish the substantive rebate right, and the amendment did not impair any vested right of the Revenue. Section 6 of the General Clauses Act did not require a different result. The rejection of the rebate claims as time-barred was therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46706</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>