<?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 (5) TMI 939 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327958</link>
    <description>The Tribunal remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority to decide the refund without rejecting it on the grounds of being time-barred. The aspect of unjust enrichment was also highlighted for verification. If the refund is sanctioned, the demand and penalty in this appeal would not sustain. Once the refund matter is settled, the demand and penalty would not stand. All appeals were disposed of by way of remand for further consideration in light of the refund decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2016 13:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=429196" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 939 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327958</link>
      <description>The Tribunal remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority to decide the refund without rejecting it on the grounds of being time-barred. The aspect of unjust enrichment was also highlighted for verification. If the refund is sanctioned, the demand and penalty in this appeal would not sustain. Once the refund matter is settled, the demand and penalty would not stand. All appeals were disposed of by way of remand for further consideration in light of the refund decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327958</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>