<?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>2011 (2) TMI 726 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207788</link>
    <description>The appeals were allowed through remand, granting the appellants an opportunity to present evidence to establish that they did not pass on the duty burden to buyers. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of providing a fair hearing and requiring concrete evidence to support claims of unjust enrichment. The decision underscored the significance of due process in such cases, setting aside the previous order and remanding the case for further proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Dec 2011 07:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=181262" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (2) TMI 726 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207788</link>
      <description>The appeals were allowed through remand, granting the appellants an opportunity to present evidence to establish that they did not pass on the duty burden to buyers. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of providing a fair hearing and requiring concrete evidence to support claims of unjust enrichment. The decision underscored the significance of due process in such cases, setting aside the previous order and remanding the case for further proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207788</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>