<?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>2019 (6) TMI 1323 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382246</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner&#039;s order that rejected the refund claim based on unjust enrichment. The decision was made due to jurisdictional issues and discrepancies in the filing process, leading to the conclusion that the Commissioner&#039;s order lacked legal authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Aug 2019 10:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=576874" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (6) TMI 1323 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382246</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner&#039;s order that rejected the refund claim based on unjust enrichment. The decision was made due to jurisdictional issues and discrepancies in the filing process, leading to the conclusion that the Commissioner&#039;s order lacked legal authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382246</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>