<?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 (12) TMI 109 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4085</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed for remand to the adjudicating authority for further examination of the evidence related to unjust enrichment, emphasizing the importance of providing sufficient evidence to support refund claims and the procedural requirements for admitting new evidence before appellate authorities.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=43432" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (12) TMI 109 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4085</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed for remand to the adjudicating authority for further examination of the evidence related to unjust enrichment, emphasizing the importance of providing sufficient evidence to support refund claims and the procedural requirements for admitting new evidence before appellate authorities.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4085</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>