<?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>1998 (3) TMI 160 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49194</link>
    <description>A rebate claim filed bona fide before the wrong authority was treated as a curable procedural mistake, and the delay in the revision application was condoned. Where the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner had entertained, processed, and corresponded on the claim before returning it on jurisdictional grounds, rejection of the rebate claim as time-barred was set aside and consequential relief was allowed if the claim was otherwise in order. The text further states that rebate/refund claims were required to be decided within the prescribed disposal period, first under an administrative instruction fixing six weeks and later under a statutory three-month framework, and that this time limit had been breached.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 13:43:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=87674" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (3) TMI 160 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49194</link>
      <description>A rebate claim filed bona fide before the wrong authority was treated as a curable procedural mistake, and the delay in the revision application was condoned. Where the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner had entertained, processed, and corresponded on the claim before returning it on jurisdictional grounds, rejection of the rebate claim as time-barred was set aside and consequential relief was allowed if the claim was otherwise in order. The text further states that rebate/refund claims were required to be decided within the prescribed disposal period, first under an administrative instruction fixing six weeks and later under a statutory three-month framework, and that this time limit had been breached.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49194</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>