<?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>2014 (1) TMI 167 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241942</link>
    <description>The appeals were allowed by the Member (T), granting consequential relief to the appellants. The rejection of refund claims based on netting impact on reserves and unjust enrichment applicability was overturned. The advocate&#039;s argument that netting out was in line with accounting principles and that no unjust enrichment occurred was accepted. The judgment highlighted the significance of comprehending accounting practices and unjust enrichment principles in similar cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Jan 2014 06:40:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=341665" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 167 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241942</link>
      <description>The appeals were allowed by the Member (T), granting consequential relief to the appellants. The rejection of refund claims based on netting impact on reserves and unjust enrichment applicability was overturned. The advocate&#039;s argument that netting out was in line with accounting principles and that no unjust enrichment occurred was accepted. The judgment highlighted the significance of comprehending accounting practices and unjust enrichment principles in similar cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241942</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>