<?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 (8) TMI 1071 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331687</link>
    <description>The SC held that turnover discounts known at the time of sale qualify for deduction under Section 4 of the Central Excises Salt Act, allowing refund claims based on credit notes raised post-clearance. However, where the duty incidence was passed on to buyers and ultimately consumers, refund claims result in unjust enrichment and are disallowed under Section 12-B. In cases where the assessee bore the duty burden and returned excess duty to buyers, refunds were granted. The Court allowed appeals where duty was passed on and disallowed refund claims to prevent unjust enrichment, but dismissed Revenue&#039;s appeal where the assessee demonstrated bearing the duty burden and refunding excess duty. The decision was partly in favor of Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2025 16:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=439591" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 1071 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331687</link>
      <description>The SC held that turnover discounts known at the time of sale qualify for deduction under Section 4 of the Central Excises Salt Act, allowing refund claims based on credit notes raised post-clearance. However, where the duty incidence was passed on to buyers and ultimately consumers, refund claims result in unjust enrichment and are disallowed under Section 12-B. In cases where the assessee bore the duty burden and returned excess duty to buyers, refunds were granted. The Court allowed appeals where duty was passed on and disallowed refund claims to prevent unjust enrichment, but dismissed Revenue&#039;s appeal where the assessee demonstrated bearing the duty burden and refunding excess duty. The decision was partly in favor of Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331687</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>