<?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 (10) TMI 719 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265444</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision regarding the refund request and unjust enrichment principle under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act 1944. The Court emphasized compliance with interim orders and established legal principles in determining unjust enrichment applicability. The appeal lacked merit as it did not raise any substantial question of law, supported by consistent Supreme Court application of legal principles in similar cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Sep 2017 12:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=400959" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (10) TMI 719 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265444</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision regarding the refund request and unjust enrichment principle under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act 1944. The Court emphasized compliance with interim orders and established legal principles in determining unjust enrichment applicability. The appeal lacked merit as it did not raise any substantial question of law, supported by consistent Supreme Court application of legal principles in similar cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265444</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>