<?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 (11) TMI 420 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211921</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the decision to refund the excess duty paid by the assessee, finding that the conditions of Section 11B were satisfied and the burden of duty was not passed on to the consignee. The court dismissed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee and overturning the first appellate authority&#039;s decision based on the principle of unjust enrichment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Sep 2012 16:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=185336" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (11) TMI 420 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211921</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the decision to refund the excess duty paid by the assessee, finding that the conditions of Section 11B were satisfied and the burden of duty was not passed on to the consignee. The court dismissed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee and overturning the first appellate authority&#039;s decision based on the principle of unjust enrichment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211921</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>