<?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 (8) TMI 321 - CESTAT  MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250371</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld the denial of the refund claim by a cable manufacturer due to the appellant&#039;s failure to substantiate their entitlement with essential documentation, specifically the final price of the cable. Despite arguments regarding unjust enrichment provisions not being in force during the relevant period, the lack of proof regarding the final price was crucial. The appeal was dismissed, emphasizing the importance of providing comprehensive evidence to support refund claims in customs and excise matters.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Aug 2014 12:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=361844" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (8) TMI 321 - CESTAT  MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250371</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld the denial of the refund claim by a cable manufacturer due to the appellant&#039;s failure to substantiate their entitlement with essential documentation, specifically the final price of the cable. Despite arguments regarding unjust enrichment provisions not being in force during the relevant period, the lack of proof regarding the final price was crucial. The appeal was dismissed, emphasizing the importance of providing comprehensive evidence to support refund claims in customs and excise matters.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250371</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>