<?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 (6) TMI 96 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52012</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the lower authorities&#039; orders and directed the refund claim to be processed under Rule 173-I(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, rather than Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. The case was remanded to the original authority for adherence to the prescribed procedure under Rule 173-I(2), ultimately disposing of the appeal in this manner.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jun 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Sep 2010 17:37:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90490" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (6) TMI 96 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52012</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the lower authorities&#039; orders and directed the refund claim to be processed under Rule 173-I(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, rather than Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. The case was remanded to the original authority for adherence to the prescribed procedure under Rule 173-I(2), ultimately disposing of the appeal in this manner.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jun 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52012</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>