<?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>2006 (4) TMI 320 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118194</link>
    <description>Customs refund arising from finalisation of provisional assessment remains subject to the doctrine of unjust enrichment, so the claimant must establish that the duty burden was not passed on. A separate challenge to the assessment order is not required where the refund claim was filed before finalisation of the Bills of Entry and the final assessment itself granted exemption, making the Priya Blue principle inapplicable on those facts. The claimed government control over fertilizer prices was treated as a relevant factual issue requiring verification. The refund was recognised on merits, but final relief depended on fresh examination of unjust enrichment and supporting evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Jun 2012 11:13:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=155191" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (4) TMI 320 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118194</link>
      <description>Customs refund arising from finalisation of provisional assessment remains subject to the doctrine of unjust enrichment, so the claimant must establish that the duty burden was not passed on. A separate challenge to the assessment order is not required where the refund claim was filed before finalisation of the Bills of Entry and the final assessment itself granted exemption, making the Priya Blue principle inapplicable on those facts. The claimed government control over fertilizer prices was treated as a relevant factual issue requiring verification. The refund was recognised on merits, but final relief depended on fresh examination of unjust enrichment and supporting evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118194</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>