<?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 194 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263526</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed Revenue&#039;s appeal against the order concerning the import of Samsung dual SIM mobile phones suspected of infringing Intellectual Property Rights. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the suspension of clearance, emphasizing the right holder&#039;s liability for demurrage charges even after goods&#039; release. Revenue&#039;s challenge on demurrage recovery post-release was rejected, as the Commissioner (Appeals) adequately addressed the issue. The Tribunal found no valid grounds for Revenue&#039;s grievance, upholding the recovery of demurrage charges by enforcing the bond executed by the right holder. The appeal was dismissed as misconceived under Section 129A of the Customs Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Sep 2015 07:52:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=395809" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (9) TMI 194 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263526</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed Revenue&#039;s appeal against the order concerning the import of Samsung dual SIM mobile phones suspected of infringing Intellectual Property Rights. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the suspension of clearance, emphasizing the right holder&#039;s liability for demurrage charges even after goods&#039; release. Revenue&#039;s challenge on demurrage recovery post-release was rejected, as the Commissioner (Appeals) adequately addressed the issue. The Tribunal found no valid grounds for Revenue&#039;s grievance, upholding the recovery of demurrage charges by enforcing the bond executed by the right holder. The appeal was dismissed as misconceived under Section 129A of the Customs Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263526</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>