<?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 241 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107577</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the respondents in a dispute over a refund claim for waste and scrap of cables. The Commissioner (Appeals) accepted the respondents&#039; argument that excise duty was not passed on to customers, directing the credited amounts accordingly. The respondents provided evidence and argued that duty was paid from their own pocket, not recovered from customers. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, citing the duty being paid under protest and lack of merit in the Revenue&#039;s arguments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2012 15:07:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=144594" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (6) TMI 241 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107577</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the respondents in a dispute over a refund claim for waste and scrap of cables. The Commissioner (Appeals) accepted the respondents&#039; argument that excise duty was not passed on to customers, directing the credited amounts accordingly. The respondents provided evidence and argued that duty was paid from their own pocket, not recovered from customers. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, citing the duty being paid under protest and lack of merit in the Revenue&#039;s arguments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107577</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>