<?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 (10) TMI 308 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333288</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, quashed the impugned order, and directed the refund of Rs. 2,48,600 to the appellant promptly. The decision was based on the appellant&#039;s ability to establish the absence of unjust enrichment, the sole ground for denying the refund, thus entitling them to the refund amount claimed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Oct 2016 13:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=444215" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (10) TMI 308 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333288</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, quashed the impugned order, and directed the refund of Rs. 2,48,600 to the appellant promptly. The decision was based on the appellant&#039;s ability to establish the absence of unjust enrichment, the sole ground for denying the refund, thus entitling them to the refund amount claimed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333288</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>