<?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>2002 (7) TMI 135 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51290</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the original order granting refund was valid and should prevail over the subsequent denial of the refund claim. The Commissioner&#039;s emphasis on departmental procedures and audit requirements was considered to be legally unfounded, leading to the appeal being allowed in favor of the appellants and granting them consequential benefits based on the initial refund order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Sep 2010 18:50:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89768" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (7) TMI 135 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51290</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the original order granting refund was valid and should prevail over the subsequent denial of the refund claim. The Commissioner&#039;s emphasis on departmental procedures and audit requirements was considered to be legally unfounded, leading to the appeal being allowed in favor of the appellants and granting them consequential benefits based on the initial refund order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51290</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>