<?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>2007 (1) TMI 57 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1792</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the case for reconsideration of the refund claim. The appellant&#039;s evidence, including a certificate of profit and loss account and a CA&#039;s certificate, was found to be crucial in establishing that the duty amount was not recovered from other parties. The Tribunal disagreed with the Commissioner (Appeals) and emphasized the importance of properly evaluating the evidence presented, ultimately allowing the appeals by remand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2008 10:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=41177" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (1) TMI 57 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1792</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the case for reconsideration of the refund claim. The appellant&#039;s evidence, including a certificate of profit and loss account and a CA&#039;s certificate, was found to be crucial in establishing that the duty amount was not recovered from other parties. The Tribunal disagreed with the Commissioner (Appeals) and emphasized the importance of properly evaluating the evidence presented, ultimately allowing the appeals by remand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1792</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>