<?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>2015 (1) TMI 160 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254961</link>
    <description>The appellate tribunal overturned the Commissioner (Appeals) decision and reinstated the original adjudicating authority&#039;s ruling in a case involving a refund claim under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. for Special Additional Duty of Customs (SAD) paid on imported goods. The appellant&#039;s argument that the goods sold against the invoice date did not match those imported was rejected. The tribunal accepted the appellant&#039;s justification for the invoice date discrepancy based on the requirement to clear imported Hazardous Waste directly to actual users, emphasizing that the delay in customs clearance did not invalidate the invoice date.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2015 06:54:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=373163" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (1) TMI 160 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254961</link>
      <description>The appellate tribunal overturned the Commissioner (Appeals) decision and reinstated the original adjudicating authority&#039;s ruling in a case involving a refund claim under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. for Special Additional Duty of Customs (SAD) paid on imported goods. The appellant&#039;s argument that the goods sold against the invoice date did not match those imported was rejected. The tribunal accepted the appellant&#039;s justification for the invoice date discrepancy based on the requirement to clear imported Hazardous Waste directly to actual users, emphasizing that the delay in customs clearance did not invalidate the invoice date.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254961</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>