<?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>2001 (11) TMI 476 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100922</link>
    <description>Imported aluminium scrap classified as Taldork and Taldon was challenged on the basis that the goods did not meet the ISRI Scrap Specifications Circular 2001 parameters. The appellants relied on written correspondence showing mutually accepted variations in density specifications, supported by a supplier letter and reply accepting standard material, to argue that the imported goods conformed to the transaction-specific terms. The Tribunal noted that this material had already been placed before the adjudicating authority and distinguished the facts from an earlier Tribunal decision involving similar scrap imports. As the matter raised a factual variation against an existing two-member bench precedent, both appeals were directed to be placed before the President for constitution of a two-member bench.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Nov 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 18:10:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=137972" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (11) TMI 476 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100922</link>
      <description>Imported aluminium scrap classified as Taldork and Taldon was challenged on the basis that the goods did not meet the ISRI Scrap Specifications Circular 2001 parameters. The appellants relied on written correspondence showing mutually accepted variations in density specifications, supported by a supplier letter and reply accepting standard material, to argue that the imported goods conformed to the transaction-specific terms. The Tribunal noted that this material had already been placed before the adjudicating authority and distinguished the facts from an earlier Tribunal decision involving similar scrap imports. As the matter raised a factual variation against an existing two-member bench precedent, both appeals were directed to be placed before the President for constitution of a two-member bench.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Nov 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100922</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>