<?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>1995 (12) TMI 158 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84901</link>
    <description>An amended unjust enrichment rule could not be used to defeat a refund claim where the refund had already been sanctioned and paid before the Central Excises &amp; Customs Laws (Amendment) Act, 1991 came into force. On those facts, the amendment had no retrospective operation over a completed refund, so the refund could not be reopened on the ground of unjust enrichment. The Revenue&#039;s challenge therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Aug 2011 13:29:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121968" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (12) TMI 158 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84901</link>
      <description>An amended unjust enrichment rule could not be used to defeat a refund claim where the refund had already been sanctioned and paid before the Central Excises &amp; Customs Laws (Amendment) Act, 1991 came into force. On those facts, the amendment had no retrospective operation over a completed refund, so the refund could not be reopened on the ground of unjust enrichment. The Revenue&#039;s challenge therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84901</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>