<?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>2007 (2) TMI 399 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120939</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed by the Tribunal as it found that the direction to credit the refund to the Consumer Welfare Fund went beyond the scope of the Commissioner&#039;s order, which had already allowed the appellant&#039;s appeal and directed the lower authority to quantify the refund amount. The Tribunal emphasized procedural correctness over the principle of unjust enrichment in this case, setting aside the order directing the refund to the Fund.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2012 15:19:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=157933" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (2) TMI 399 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120939</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed by the Tribunal as it found that the direction to credit the refund to the Consumer Welfare Fund went beyond the scope of the Commissioner&#039;s order, which had already allowed the appellant&#039;s appeal and directed the lower authority to quantify the refund amount. The Tribunal emphasized procedural correctness over the principle of unjust enrichment in this case, setting aside the order directing the refund to the Fund.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120939</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>