<?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 (12) TMI 493 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125028</link>
    <description>An appellate authority deciding a refund dispute must confine itself to the issue raised in the appeal and should not reject the claim on an extraneous ground. Where the controversy is whether the incidence of duty was passed on, that question must be determined on the merits before any refund can be finally dealt with. If no finding is recorded on that core issue, the appellate order cannot properly stand and the matter requires reconsideration after hearing the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2012 12:26:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=161956" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (12) TMI 493 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125028</link>
      <description>An appellate authority deciding a refund dispute must confine itself to the issue raised in the appeal and should not reject the claim on an extraneous ground. Where the controversy is whether the incidence of duty was passed on, that question must be determined on the merits before any refund can be finally dealt with. If no finding is recorded on that core issue, the appellate order cannot properly stand and the matter requires reconsideration after hearing the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125028</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>