<?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 (9) TMI 885 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211993</link>
    <description>The revision application filed by the Commissioner of Custom challenging the order-in-appeal regarding a drawback claim under Section 74 of the Customs Act was rejected. The dispute centered on the establishment of goods&#039; identity for claiming drawback, with the government affirming that the Assistant Commissioner (Drawback) correctly assessed the identity based on the examination report. Despite procedural lapses, the government upheld the order-in-appeal, emphasizing that the respondent should not be penalized for the Custom Officer&#039;s oversight. Consequently, the validity of the drawback claim under Section 74 was confirmed, and the order-in-appeal was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Apr 2012 18:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=185408" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (9) TMI 885 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211993</link>
      <description>The revision application filed by the Commissioner of Custom challenging the order-in-appeal regarding a drawback claim under Section 74 of the Customs Act was rejected. The dispute centered on the establishment of goods&#039; identity for claiming drawback, with the government affirming that the Assistant Commissioner (Drawback) correctly assessed the identity based on the examination report. Despite procedural lapses, the government upheld the order-in-appeal, emphasizing that the respondent should not be penalized for the Custom Officer&#039;s oversight. Consequently, the validity of the drawback claim under Section 74 was confirmed, and the order-in-appeal was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211993</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>