<?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 (2) TMI 301 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31000</link>
    <description>Refund claims arising from duty paid at a higher specific rate pending approval of the classification list were treated as timely because the assessment process had not reached finality until the classification list was approved and the RT-12 assessments were finalised. On that basis, the applications filed after approval of the lower tariff rate were found to fall within the refund limitation period. The matter was to be examined by the original authority on merits, with the assessee given an opportunity to show that the duty incidence had not been passed on, as the claim remained subject to the doctrine of unjust enrichment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=69653" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (2) TMI 301 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31000</link>
      <description>Refund claims arising from duty paid at a higher specific rate pending approval of the classification list were treated as timely because the assessment process had not reached finality until the classification list was approved and the RT-12 assessments were finalised. On that basis, the applications filed after approval of the lower tariff rate were found to fall within the refund limitation period. The matter was to be examined by the original authority on merits, with the assessee given an opportunity to show that the duty incidence had not been passed on, as the claim remained subject to the doctrine of unjust enrichment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31000</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>