<?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>2008 (5) TMI 73 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30472</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the decisions of the lower authorities, rejecting the appeal and confirming that the doctrine of unjust enrichment applied to the refund claim. The appellants failed to rebut the presumption of passing on the incidence, and thus, the refund was correctly credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=69127" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (5) TMI 73 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30472</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the decisions of the lower authorities, rejecting the appeal and confirming that the doctrine of unjust enrichment applied to the refund claim. The appellants failed to rebut the presumption of passing on the incidence, and thus, the refund was correctly credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30472</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>