<?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>2015 (9) TMI 877 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264209</link>
    <description>Refund of differential central excise duty arising from trade discounts accepted at final assessment could not be refused on unjust enrichment grounds. The assessment had been provisional, the discount particulars were furnished and accepted at finalisation, and the refund claim flowed from that process. The court noted that the duty had not been shown to be collected from the end consumer, as the discounts were passed on to wholesale distributors through credit notes at the prescribed stage of clearance. Reliance on a different factual scenario was found misplaced, and the contrary tribunal view was treated as inconsistent with an identical matter decided by the same court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Sep 2015 11:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=397956" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (9) TMI 877 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264209</link>
      <description>Refund of differential central excise duty arising from trade discounts accepted at final assessment could not be refused on unjust enrichment grounds. The assessment had been provisional, the discount particulars were furnished and accepted at finalisation, and the refund claim flowed from that process. The court noted that the duty had not been shown to be collected from the end consumer, as the discounts were passed on to wholesale distributors through credit notes at the prescribed stage of clearance. Reliance on a different factual scenario was found misplaced, and the contrary tribunal view was treated as inconsistent with an identical matter decided by the same court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264209</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>