<?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>1997 (9) TMI 278 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88025</link>
    <description>An importer seeking refund and reclassification after customs clearance must produce clear and unimpeachable evidence that the goods did not match the description in the bill of entry. Where the declared description was accepted on examination, the goods were cleared, and no contrary evidence was available because the goods were no longer examinable, a later claim of different classification is not substantiated. The refund and reclassification claim was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2011 15:23:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=125091" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (9) TMI 278 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88025</link>
      <description>An importer seeking refund and reclassification after customs clearance must produce clear and unimpeachable evidence that the goods did not match the description in the bill of entry. Where the declared description was accepted on examination, the goods were cleared, and no contrary evidence was available because the goods were no longer examinable, a later claim of different classification is not substantiated. The refund and reclassification claim was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88025</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>