<?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>2020 (3) TMI 102 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392958</link>
    <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the burden of export duty had not been passed on to customers. Therefore, the refund claim was not required to be credited to the consumer welfare fund. The impugned order was modified, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2020 11:40:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=605732" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (3) TMI 102 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392958</link>
      <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the burden of export duty had not been passed on to customers. Therefore, the refund claim was not required to be credited to the consumer welfare fund. The impugned order was modified, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392958</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>