<?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>2000 (10) TMI 259 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94136</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed, setting aside the impugned order and remanding the issue for further decision. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a re-examination of the goods by experts and a fresh decision by the adjudicating authority, stressing the importance of resolving the matter promptly due to the extended detention of the goods. Failure to issue a new order within two months would result in the release of the goods after levying duty based on the transaction value.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Nov 2011 12:56:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=131196" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (10) TMI 259 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94136</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed, setting aside the impugned order and remanding the issue for further decision. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a re-examination of the goods by experts and a fresh decision by the adjudicating authority, stressing the importance of resolving the matter promptly due to the extended detention of the goods. Failure to issue a new order within two months would result in the release of the goods after levying duty based on the transaction value.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94136</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>