<?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 (10) TMI 34 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264759</link>
    <description>An adjudicating authority in remand proceedings cannot go beyond the Tribunal&#039;s limited directions: where the remand confined reconsideration to the normal limitation period, confirmation of demand for the extended period and imposition of penalty were unsustainable and had to be set aside. The claim for concessional customs duty on imports from Indonesia also required fresh factual examination because the documentary evidence of origin had not been fully assessed, including the importer&#039;s explanation for non-production of originals. The matter was therefore remanded for reconsideration strictly within the permitted period and for re-examination of eligibility under the relevant notifications.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2017 11:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=399485" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (10) TMI 34 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264759</link>
      <description>An adjudicating authority in remand proceedings cannot go beyond the Tribunal&#039;s limited directions: where the remand confined reconsideration to the normal limitation period, confirmation of demand for the extended period and imposition of penalty were unsustainable and had to be set aside. The claim for concessional customs duty on imports from Indonesia also required fresh factual examination because the documentary evidence of origin had not been fully assessed, including the importer&#039;s explanation for non-production of originals. The matter was therefore remanded for reconsideration strictly within the permitted period and for re-examination of eligibility under the relevant notifications.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264759</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>