<?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>2009 (12) TMI 756 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153578</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the first appellate authority&#039;s decision and reinstating the adjudicating authority&#039;s approval of the refund totaling Rs. 3,96,675/- to the appellant. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of the chartered accountant&#039;s certificate in refund matters and found insufficient evidence to justify rejecting it. It concluded that there was no concrete proof of unjust enrichment, leading to the decision in favor of the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Jul 2013 11:15:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=170613" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (12) TMI 756 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153578</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the first appellate authority&#039;s decision and reinstating the adjudicating authority&#039;s approval of the refund totaling Rs. 3,96,675/- to the appellant. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of the chartered accountant&#039;s certificate in refund matters and found insufficient evidence to justify rejecting it. It concluded that there was no concrete proof of unjust enrichment, leading to the decision in favor of the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153578</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>