<?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 (10) TMI 205 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208271</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the order crediting the refund to the Consumer Welfare Fund, as the appellants failed to prove non-transfer of duty burden to customers despite contested invoices and customer verification confirming duty payment. The Tribunal found that the duty burden had been passed on to customers, as per Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, and the appellants did not demonstrate in their books that the amounts were not receivable. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2012 02:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=181742" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (10) TMI 205 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208271</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the order crediting the refund to the Consumer Welfare Fund, as the appellants failed to prove non-transfer of duty burden to customers despite contested invoices and customer verification confirming duty payment. The Tribunal found that the duty burden had been passed on to customers, as per Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, and the appellants did not demonstrate in their books that the amounts were not receivable. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208271</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>