<?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>2011 (4) TMI 1289 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172174</link>
    <description>Refund of duty paid on defective imported goods was sought under Customs Notification No. 51/96, but the lower authorities rejected the claim on the grounds of challenge to assessment and limitation. The Tribunal set aside those orders and remanded the matter for de novo enquiry, and the HC found no error in that course. The remand was upheld, leaving the refund claim to be reconsidered afresh by the Original Authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2015 11:58:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=393281" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (4) TMI 1289 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172174</link>
      <description>Refund of duty paid on defective imported goods was sought under Customs Notification No. 51/96, but the lower authorities rejected the claim on the grounds of challenge to assessment and limitation. The Tribunal set aside those orders and remanded the matter for de novo enquiry, and the HC found no error in that course. The remand was upheld, leaving the refund claim to be reconsidered afresh by the Original Authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172174</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>