<?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>2025 (8) TMI 417 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776230</link>
    <description>The CESTAT Kolkata upheld the refund claim of excess Additional Duty of Customs (CVD) paid by the appellant, rejecting the Revenue&#039;s contention that a self-assessed bill of entry is conclusively correct. The tribunal ruled that excess duty paid under self-assessment is refundable, as allowing otherwise would negate the refund mechanism. The issue of unjust enrichment was negated based on a Chartered Accountant&#039;s certificate showing the duty was not passed to buyers and was recorded as recoverable in accounts. The appellant fulfilled the requirements under Sections 27 and 28C of the Customs Act, supported by documentary evidence including sale invoices and tax returns. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed, affirming the order granting the refund.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2025 07:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=841498" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (8) TMI 417 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776230</link>
      <description>The CESTAT Kolkata upheld the refund claim of excess Additional Duty of Customs (CVD) paid by the appellant, rejecting the Revenue&#039;s contention that a self-assessed bill of entry is conclusively correct. The tribunal ruled that excess duty paid under self-assessment is refundable, as allowing otherwise would negate the refund mechanism. The issue of unjust enrichment was negated based on a Chartered Accountant&#039;s certificate showing the duty was not passed to buyers and was recorded as recoverable in accounts. The appellant fulfilled the requirements under Sections 27 and 28C of the Customs Act, supported by documentary evidence including sale invoices and tax returns. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed, affirming the order granting the refund.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776230</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>