<?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>2008 (4) TMI 548 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123421</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the recovery of Rs. 6,26,782/- with interest under the Central Excise Act and Rules. It ruled that adjustment of excess duty paid with short-paid duty is not allowed without determining &#039;unjust enrichment.&#039; The appellant was directed to deposit a specified sum within a timeframe, failing which recovery of the remaining amount would proceed. Compliance reporting was required by a specified date.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2012 18:01:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=160387" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (4) TMI 548 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123421</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the recovery of Rs. 6,26,782/- with interest under the Central Excise Act and Rules. It ruled that adjustment of excess duty paid with short-paid duty is not allowed without determining &#039;unjust enrichment.&#039; The appellant was directed to deposit a specified sum within a timeframe, failing which recovery of the remaining amount would proceed. Compliance reporting was required by a specified date.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123421</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>