<?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>Refund Denied: Appellant&#039;s Cost Reduction Leads to Inadmissible Claim Due to Unjust Enrichment and Excise Duty Recovery.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=16736</link>
    <description>Refund of duty rejected – it was the cost of the product which was reduced by the appellant during the relevant period and the that the refund claim is not admissible on the basis of unjust enrichment where reduced cost along with leviable excise duty was being recovered by them - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jan 2014 12:02:33 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Jan 2014 12:02:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=342272" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Refund Denied: Appellant&#039;s Cost Reduction Leads to Inadmissible Claim Due to Unjust Enrichment and Excise Duty Recovery.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=16736</link>
      <description>Refund of duty rejected – it was the cost of the product which was reduced by the appellant during the relevant period and the that the refund claim is not admissible on the basis of unjust enrichment where reduced cost along with leviable excise duty was being recovered by them - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jan 2014 12:02:33 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=16736</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>