<?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 1056 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209193</link>
    <description>The appeal was deemed infructuous as the Tribunal had previously set aside the first Order-in-Appeal, leading to a re-examination of the bar of unjust enrichment by the original authority. The Commissioner of Central Excise&#039;s present appeal was dismissed, and the case was disposed of with instructions for further consideration by the original authority after providing the party with a fair opportunity to be heard.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Jul 2013 15:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=182645" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (2) TMI 1056 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209193</link>
      <description>The appeal was deemed infructuous as the Tribunal had previously set aside the first Order-in-Appeal, leading to a re-examination of the bar of unjust enrichment by the original authority. The Commissioner of Central Excise&#039;s present appeal was dismissed, and the case was disposed of with instructions for further consideration by the original authority after providing the party with a fair opportunity to be heard.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209193</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>