<?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 (2) TMI 783 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256783</link>
    <description>The tribunal set aside the impugned order confirming customs duty demands against the appellant for importing specific coke types. The tribunal found discrepancies in the sampling and testing procedures, noting the failure to comply with directions and reliance on unreliable test reports. It emphasized the importance of proper sampling methods and adherence to testing standards. The tribunal concluded that the duty demands were not legally sustainable due to procedural errors and lack of evidence, ultimately allowing the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Feb 2015 15:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=376570" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (2) TMI 783 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256783</link>
      <description>The tribunal set aside the impugned order confirming customs duty demands against the appellant for importing specific coke types. The tribunal found discrepancies in the sampling and testing procedures, noting the failure to comply with directions and reliance on unreliable test reports. It emphasized the importance of proper sampling methods and adherence to testing standards. The tribunal concluded that the duty demands were not legally sustainable due to procedural errors and lack of evidence, ultimately allowing the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256783</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>