<?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 (12) TMI 158 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253814</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the disbursement of the determined refund within six weeks along with interest. The decision was based on the interpretation that passing on the duty burden to the customer, even with the issuance of credit notes, did not exempt the refund claim from unjust enrichment. Previous judgments were cited to support this ruling, emphasizing the conditions for refund eligibility and the role of the Consumer Welfare Fund.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=370147" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (12) TMI 158 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253814</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the disbursement of the determined refund within six weeks along with interest. The decision was based on the interpretation that passing on the duty burden to the customer, even with the issuance of credit notes, did not exempt the refund claim from unjust enrichment. Previous judgments were cited to support this ruling, emphasizing the conditions for refund eligibility and the role of the Consumer Welfare Fund.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253814</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>