<?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>2010 (12) TMI 135 - CESTAT,  BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202731</link>
    <description>An appellate remand without jurisdiction may be set aside, yet fresh adjudication can still be directed where the original proceedings were incomplete. The document states that the assessee was denied natural justice because laboratory test reports relied on by the revenue were not supplied, preventing an effective challenge to that evidence. It also notes that the exemption claim under Notification No. 21/2002 had not been fully examined for all bills of entry, including the relevant product parameters. The matter therefore required reconsideration by the original authority after giving the assessee a proper opportunity to meet the laboratory evidence and press the exemption claim.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Jun 2013 17:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=176304" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (12) TMI 135 - CESTAT,  BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202731</link>
      <description>An appellate remand without jurisdiction may be set aside, yet fresh adjudication can still be directed where the original proceedings were incomplete. The document states that the assessee was denied natural justice because laboratory test reports relied on by the revenue were not supplied, preventing an effective challenge to that evidence. It also notes that the exemption claim under Notification No. 21/2002 had not been fully examined for all bills of entry, including the relevant product parameters. The matter therefore required reconsideration by the original authority after giving the assessee a proper opportunity to meet the laboratory evidence and press the exemption claim.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202731</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>