<?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 (10) TMI 374 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252240</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the denial of the refund claim based on unjust enrichment. It held that in cases of provisional assessment following Apex Court judgments, the bar of unjust enrichment does not apply. The rejection of refund claims initially due to lack of documents meant that the issue of unjust enrichment was not considered at that stage. Therefore, the Tribunal granted the appeal, providing relief to the appellant in accordance with legal precedents and specific circumstances of the case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2014 12:16:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=366946" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (10) TMI 374 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252240</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the denial of the refund claim based on unjust enrichment. It held that in cases of provisional assessment following Apex Court judgments, the bar of unjust enrichment does not apply. The rejection of refund claims initially due to lack of documents meant that the issue of unjust enrichment was not considered at that stage. Therefore, the Tribunal granted the appeal, providing relief to the appellant in accordance with legal precedents and specific circumstances of the case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252240</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>