<?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 (3) TMI 200 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257264</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, stating the appellants were entitled to the refund claim without interest due to procedural errors by both parties. The judgment clarified the procedural requirements for claiming refunds, eligibility for drawback under Section 74, and the correct export procedures from a Customs bonded area, emphasizing adherence to statutory provisions to ensure fair treatment in customs matters.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2016 12:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=378096" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (3) TMI 200 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257264</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, stating the appellants were entitled to the refund claim without interest due to procedural errors by both parties. The judgment clarified the procedural requirements for claiming refunds, eligibility for drawback under Section 74, and the correct export procedures from a Customs bonded area, emphasizing adherence to statutory provisions to ensure fair treatment in customs matters.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257264</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>