<?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 (6) TMI 528 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204469</link>
    <description>The judgment favored the importer, granting a refund for the short shipped motherboards (MB 4407.001) by setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal. The decision was based on the evidence presented, discrepancies in documentation, and the importer&#039;s ability to establish the occurrence of a short shipment through contemporaneous documents. The judgment emphasizes the importance of documentary evidence in proving claims related to import consignments and duty refunds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 May 2011 18:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=178004" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (6) TMI 528 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204469</link>
      <description>The judgment favored the importer, granting a refund for the short shipped motherboards (MB 4407.001) by setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal. The decision was based on the evidence presented, discrepancies in documentation, and the importer&#039;s ability to establish the occurrence of a short shipment through contemporaneous documents. The judgment emphasizes the importance of documentary evidence in proving claims related to import consignments and duty refunds.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204469</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>