<?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>2018 (11) TMI 905 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370562</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai ruled in favor of M/s Evergreen Engineering Co Pvt Ltd, allowing their appeal against the rejection of the claim for refund of the duty component in the debit note issued for signage supplied to Mumbai International Airport Ltd in 2008. The Tribunal held that the assessable value should reflect the agreed transaction value at the time of clearance, even in cases of subsequent modifications. The Tribunal also determined that the appellant had not unjustly enriched themselves, thereby qualifying for the refund under section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief granted to the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2018 07:45:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=542691" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (11) TMI 905 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370562</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai ruled in favor of M/s Evergreen Engineering Co Pvt Ltd, allowing their appeal against the rejection of the claim for refund of the duty component in the debit note issued for signage supplied to Mumbai International Airport Ltd in 2008. The Tribunal held that the assessable value should reflect the agreed transaction value at the time of clearance, even in cases of subsequent modifications. The Tribunal also determined that the appellant had not unjustly enriched themselves, thereby qualifying for the refund under section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief granted to the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370562</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>