<?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 (10) TMI 429 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114558</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) failed to comply with its remand directive by considering fresh material post-show-cause notice issuance. The reliance on a report from the Central Revenue Laboratory, received after the notice, was deemed impermissible as the Kerala High Court had directed evaluation by specific laboratories. The Tribunal held that decisions should have been based solely on reports from these designated labs, rendering the Central Research Laboratory report inadmissible. Consequently, the Commissioner&#039;s order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, emphasizing the importance of following directives and using evidence available during initial proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 16:49:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151557" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (10) TMI 429 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114558</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) failed to comply with its remand directive by considering fresh material post-show-cause notice issuance. The reliance on a report from the Central Revenue Laboratory, received after the notice, was deemed impermissible as the Kerala High Court had directed evaluation by specific laboratories. The Tribunal held that decisions should have been based solely on reports from these designated labs, rendering the Central Research Laboratory report inadmissible. Consequently, the Commissioner&#039;s order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, emphasizing the importance of following directives and using evidence available during initial proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114558</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>