<?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 (12) TMI 609 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98421</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the Customs Commissioner&#039;s decision on the valuation of imported goods, noting that the goods were not from the original manufacturers as assumed by the Commissioner. The classification of the goods was remanded to the Commissioner for a fresh decision as the initial classification lacked reasoning. The penalty imposed was set aside due to the successful appeal on classification, with the possibility of reconsideration during further proceedings. The dissenting Vice President suggested a complete remand for thorough examination, while the Third Member supported the remand on the classification issue only. Ultimately, the Tribunal remanded the valuation and classification issues for fresh decisions by the Commissioner.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:24:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=135478" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (12) TMI 609 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98421</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the Customs Commissioner&#039;s decision on the valuation of imported goods, noting that the goods were not from the original manufacturers as assumed by the Commissioner. The classification of the goods was remanded to the Commissioner for a fresh decision as the initial classification lacked reasoning. The penalty imposed was set aside due to the successful appeal on classification, with the possibility of reconsideration during further proceedings. The dissenting Vice President suggested a complete remand for thorough examination, while the Third Member supported the remand on the classification issue only. Ultimately, the Tribunal remanded the valuation and classification issues for fresh decisions by the Commissioner.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98421</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>