<?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>2011 (8) TMI 1004 - Madras High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166258</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the decision of CESTAT, dismissing the Civil Miscellaneous Appeals challenging the order setting aside the refund claim. The appellant failed to prove that the duty burden was not passed on to consumers, as there was insufficient evidence beyond the credit notes presented. The court found that the lack of additional materials weakened the appellant&#039;s case, and the precedent cited was deemed inapplicable due to the failure to meet the burden of proof.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Sep 2014 23:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=364781" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (8) TMI 1004 - Madras High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166258</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the decision of CESTAT, dismissing the Civil Miscellaneous Appeals challenging the order setting aside the refund claim. The appellant failed to prove that the duty burden was not passed on to consumers, as there was insufficient evidence beyond the credit notes presented. The court found that the lack of additional materials weakened the appellant&#039;s case, and the precedent cited was deemed inapplicable due to the failure to meet the burden of proof.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166258</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>