<?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 501 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121483</link>
    <description>The appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was dismissed. The respondent company&#039;s refund claim, based on an application made on 25-8-03, was allowed without requiring scrutiny under Section 11B. The delay in processing the refund application was attributed to legal complexities, and it was determined that there was no unjust enrichment on the part of the company. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the decision to grant the refund and rejecting the Revenue&#039;s contentions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2012 10:52:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=158477" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (2) TMI 501 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121483</link>
      <description>The appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was dismissed. The respondent company&#039;s refund claim, based on an application made on 25-8-03, was allowed without requiring scrutiny under Section 11B. The delay in processing the refund application was attributed to legal complexities, and it was determined that there was no unjust enrichment on the part of the company. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the decision to grant the refund and rejecting the Revenue&#039;s contentions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121483</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>