<?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>2010 (2) TMI 483 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78497</link>
    <description>Customs jurisdiction to reject a drawback claim was lacking where the deemed export drawback claim had been filed before the DGFT under the Foreign Trade Policy and no claim was pending before Customs. On that jurisdictional basis, the rejection was unsustainable, and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after hearing the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Nov 2010 11:19:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116618" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (2) TMI 483 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78497</link>
      <description>Customs jurisdiction to reject a drawback claim was lacking where the deemed export drawback claim had been filed before the DGFT under the Foreign Trade Policy and no claim was pending before Customs. On that jurisdictional basis, the rejection was unsustainable, and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after hearing the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78497</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>