<?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 (9) TMI 191 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263523</link>
    <description>A refund application cannot be used to reopen a completed customs assessment where the importer accepted the classification at assessment stage and never challenged it. On that basis, the refund claim was held not maintainable to the extent it sought to unsettle the unchallenged assessment. The claimed exemption under Notification No. 56/2008-Cus also failed because entitlement depended on re-examining classification at the refund stage, which was impermissible when the goods were not available for inspection and the original classification had remained unchallenged. The order rejecting refund was therefore sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2016 16:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=395806" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (9) TMI 191 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263523</link>
      <description>A refund application cannot be used to reopen a completed customs assessment where the importer accepted the classification at assessment stage and never challenged it. On that basis, the refund claim was held not maintainable to the extent it sought to unsettle the unchallenged assessment. The claimed exemption under Notification No. 56/2008-Cus also failed because entitlement depended on re-examining classification at the refund stage, which was impermissible when the goods were not available for inspection and the original classification had remained unchallenged. The order rejecting refund was therefore sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263523</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>