<?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>2013 (12) TMI 798 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241133</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal in a case involving a Bank Branch in Andhra Pradesh that had mistakenly overpaid service tax. Despite conflicting orders by different authorities, the Tribunal held that the Bank had demonstrated the excess payment without passing it on to customers, justifying the refund claim. The Deputy Commissioner&#039;s examination of records showed no evidence of unjust enrichment, leading to the Tribunal&#039;s decision in favor of the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2014 13:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=339622" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (12) TMI 798 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241133</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal in a case involving a Bank Branch in Andhra Pradesh that had mistakenly overpaid service tax. Despite conflicting orders by different authorities, the Tribunal held that the Bank had demonstrated the excess payment without passing it on to customers, justifying the refund claim. The Deputy Commissioner&#039;s examination of records showed no evidence of unjust enrichment, leading to the Tribunal&#039;s decision in favor of the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241133</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>