<?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 (5) TMI 51 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259177</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI upheld the dismissal of the appeal concerning refund claims for imported goods due to the premature nature of the claim and lack of substantiating documents. The appellant&#039;s argument of pricing discrepancy was not adequately supported with evidence, leading to the rejection of the appeal. The decision emphasized the necessity of providing substantial proof for refund claims and reiterated legal principles from previous court judgments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 May 2015 07:35:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=383612" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (5) TMI 51 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259177</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI upheld the dismissal of the appeal concerning refund claims for imported goods due to the premature nature of the claim and lack of substantiating documents. The appellant&#039;s argument of pricing discrepancy was not adequately supported with evidence, leading to the rejection of the appeal. The decision emphasized the necessity of providing substantial proof for refund claims and reiterated legal principles from previous court judgments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259177</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>