<?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>2016 (1) TMI 385 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270593</link>
    <description>A 100% Export Oriented Unit clearing goods to the Domestic Tariff Area was found entitled to the concessional rate under Notification No. 6/2003-CE rather than tariff-rate duty, because the applicable notification and duty discharge record supported that treatment. The refund claim was also held not to be barred by unjust enrichment, as invoices, buyers&#039; certificates, PLA records and a chartered accountant&#039;s certificate showed that the duty incidence had not been passed on to customers and the refund burden remained with the assessee. On that basis, the impugned orders were upheld and the Revenue&#039;s appeals were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Jan 2016 11:02:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=412643" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (1) TMI 385 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270593</link>
      <description>A 100% Export Oriented Unit clearing goods to the Domestic Tariff Area was found entitled to the concessional rate under Notification No. 6/2003-CE rather than tariff-rate duty, because the applicable notification and duty discharge record supported that treatment. The refund claim was also held not to be barred by unjust enrichment, as invoices, buyers&#039; certificates, PLA records and a chartered accountant&#039;s certificate showed that the duty incidence had not been passed on to customers and the refund burden remained with the assessee. On that basis, the impugned orders were upheld and the Revenue&#039;s appeals were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270593</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>