<?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 (6) TMI 516 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248612</link>
    <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the rejection of the refund claim based on unjust enrichment. It was found that the lower authorities erred in their decision as the concept of unjust enrichment did not apply to a non-operational and closed unit. The appellant rectified the payment error promptly, and the tribunal directed the adjudicating authority to process the refund claim within 7 days of the order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2014 11:34:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=357685" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (6) TMI 516 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248612</link>
      <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the rejection of the refund claim based on unjust enrichment. It was found that the lower authorities erred in their decision as the concept of unjust enrichment did not apply to a non-operational and closed unit. The appellant rectified the payment error promptly, and the tribunal directed the adjudicating authority to process the refund claim within 7 days of the order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248612</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>