<?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>2003 (11) TMI 497 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112780</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal against the rejection of a refund of Customs duty. Despite arguments on jurisdiction, the Tribunal found the refund claim lacked merit due to insufficient evidence to prove the alleged shortage in the consignment was not due to pilferage. The appellant&#039;s failure to provide essential documents and substantiated evidence led to the dismissal of the claim for refund.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 May 2012 17:14:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=149796" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (11) TMI 497 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112780</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal against the rejection of a refund of Customs duty. Despite arguments on jurisdiction, the Tribunal found the refund claim lacked merit due to insufficient evidence to prove the alleged shortage in the consignment was not due to pilferage. The appellant&#039;s failure to provide essential documents and substantiated evidence led to the dismissal of the claim for refund.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112780</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>