<?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>2012 (11) TMI 689 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218674</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision to reject the refund claim for excess excise duty paid due to a discrepancy in cable length supplied, emphasizing the appellant&#039;s failure to prove the overpayment was due to an error in the goods supplied. The burden of proof was on the appellant to establish the overpayment, which was not substantiated, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Nov 2012 22:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=192046" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (11) TMI 689 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218674</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision to reject the refund claim for excess excise duty paid due to a discrepancy in cable length supplied, emphasizing the appellant&#039;s failure to prove the overpayment was due to an error in the goods supplied. The burden of proof was on the appellant to establish the overpayment, which was not substantiated, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218674</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>