<?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>2010 (12) TMI 1128 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170135</link>
    <description>The appeal was successful in the case involving a denial of a refund claim for excess duty paid on a short shipment of parts. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order, and granted the refund claim with consequential relief. The Tribunal held that the refund claim was maintainable despite the lack of inspection in the presence of authorities and the failure to challenge the assessment of the original Bill of Entry.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 May 2015 11:17:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=385257" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (12) TMI 1128 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170135</link>
      <description>The appeal was successful in the case involving a denial of a refund claim for excess duty paid on a short shipment of parts. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order, and granted the refund claim with consequential relief. The Tribunal held that the refund claim was maintainable despite the lack of inspection in the presence of authorities and the failure to challenge the assessment of the original Bill of Entry.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170135</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>