<?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>2010 (4) TMI 428 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77886</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision that there was no unjust enrichment in a case where a refund claim for customs duty was made by the respondent. The Court found that as the machinery was for captive consumption and not for sale, no duty was collected from customers, thus dismissing the appeal in favor of the respondent-assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116041" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (4) TMI 428 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77886</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision that there was no unjust enrichment in a case where a refund claim for customs duty was made by the respondent. The Court found that as the machinery was for captive consumption and not for sale, no duty was collected from customers, thus dismissing the appeal in favor of the respondent-assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77886</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>