<?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>2014 (8) TMI 652 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250702</link>
    <description>A beneficial customs notification operates prospectively unless the statute or the notification expressly provides retrospective effect. Because Notification No. 64/2008-Cus. was issued after the bill of entry had been finally assessed and the goods had already gone out of customs purview, the notification could not be applied to that completed transaction. The refund claim based on the subsequent notification was therefore not maintainable, and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2014 08:58:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=363457" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (8) TMI 652 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250702</link>
      <description>A beneficial customs notification operates prospectively unless the statute or the notification expressly provides retrospective effect. Because Notification No. 64/2008-Cus. was issued after the bill of entry had been finally assessed and the goods had already gone out of customs purview, the notification could not be applied to that completed transaction. The refund claim based on the subsequent notification was therefore not maintainable, and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250702</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>