<?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>2002 (9) TMI 595 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106711</link>
    <description>Rectification is not available to revisit a final order on a debatable issue of law or fact, and an application that in substance seeks recall of the earlier conclusion is not maintainable as a mistake apparent from the record. The Tribunal had already taken the view that the value determined for duty purposes could also apply for licence purposes under import control law, on the basis that the same transaction could not carry two different values. The rectification request was therefore rejected, and the earlier valuation conclusion was left undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2012 13:06:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=143731" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (9) TMI 595 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106711</link>
      <description>Rectification is not available to revisit a final order on a debatable issue of law or fact, and an application that in substance seeks recall of the earlier conclusion is not maintainable as a mistake apparent from the record. The Tribunal had already taken the view that the value determined for duty purposes could also apply for licence purposes under import control law, on the basis that the same transaction could not carry two different values. The rectification request was therefore rejected, and the earlier valuation conclusion was left undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106711</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>