<?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>2009 (10) TMI 480 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78058</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, finding that the Special Valuation Branch (SVB) officers of Chennai Customs House lacked jurisdiction to assess the value of goods imported through Bangalore. The Tribunal declared the SVB orders null and void due to jurisdictional issues and directed a reassessment of the valuation in accordance with the Customs Valuation Rules of 2007. The matter was remanded to the original authority for a fresh decision, ensuring the appellants a fair opportunity to present their case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116196" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (10) TMI 480 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78058</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, finding that the Special Valuation Branch (SVB) officers of Chennai Customs House lacked jurisdiction to assess the value of goods imported through Bangalore. The Tribunal declared the SVB orders null and void due to jurisdictional issues and directed a reassessment of the valuation in accordance with the Customs Valuation Rules of 2007. The matter was remanded to the original authority for a fresh decision, ensuring the appellants a fair opportunity to present their case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78058</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>