<?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>2008 (12) TMI 555 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125701</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal regarding the enhancement of the imported machinery&#039;s value based on a Chartered Engineer&#039;s certificate. The Commissioner (Appeals) decision was upheld due to inconsistencies and vagueness in the certificates, lack of comparability between the referenced machines, and the dismantled condition of the machinery preventing proper inspection.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2012 13:24:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=162611" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (12) TMI 555 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125701</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal regarding the enhancement of the imported machinery&#039;s value based on a Chartered Engineer&#039;s certificate. The Commissioner (Appeals) decision was upheld due to inconsistencies and vagueness in the certificates, lack of comparability between the referenced machines, and the dismantled condition of the machinery preventing proper inspection.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125701</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>