<?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>2011 (7) TMI 843 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211388</link>
    <description>The Tribunal resolved a dispute over the assessment method for imported edible oils, deciding that there was no conflict in judgments regarding the assessment methods and duty payments. The case involved conflicting views on whether to base assessments on Ship Ullage Survey reports or Shore-tank receipts. After analyzing legal precedents and factual distinctions, the Tribunal returned the matter for a decision on the merits of the case, emphasizing the importance of specific circumstances in applying legal judgments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2016 18:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=184808" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (7) TMI 843 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211388</link>
      <description>The Tribunal resolved a dispute over the assessment method for imported edible oils, deciding that there was no conflict in judgments regarding the assessment methods and duty payments. The case involved conflicting views on whether to base assessments on Ship Ullage Survey reports or Shore-tank receipts. After analyzing legal precedents and factual distinctions, the Tribunal returned the matter for a decision on the merits of the case, emphasizing the importance of specific circumstances in applying legal judgments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211388</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>