<?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>2004 (4) TMI 331 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111353</link>
    <description>The Tribunal rejected the appellant&#039;s request to retain the file, directing the papers to be remitted to the Chennai Bench for consolidation with similar cases on jurisdictional grounds. Emphasizing the importance of avoiding conflicting opinions, the Tribunal highlighted the need for uniformity in handling cases involving technical know-how, directing consolidation with related matters for common hearing to ensure consistency in decisions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2012 11:48:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148369" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (4) TMI 331 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111353</link>
      <description>The Tribunal rejected the appellant&#039;s request to retain the file, directing the papers to be remitted to the Chennai Bench for consolidation with similar cases on jurisdictional grounds. Emphasizing the importance of avoiding conflicting opinions, the Tribunal highlighted the need for uniformity in handling cases involving technical know-how, directing consolidation with related matters for common hearing to ensure consistency in decisions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111353</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>