<?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>2016 (1) TMI 837 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271045</link>
    <description>Detention notices demanding duty and interest could not be sustained where the adjudicating authority failed to comply with earlier remand directions requiring verification and quantification of the assessable value and duty liability. The Tribunal noted that the appellant had furnished the required calculations and made deposits, yet the directed verification was not undertaken before further demand was raised. The matter therefore had to be examined afresh by the adjudicating authority after hearing the appellant and completing the quantification exercise. The impugned notices were set aside and the dispute on any remaining duty or interest liability was left open for fresh determination on remand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:03:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=414111" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (1) TMI 837 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271045</link>
      <description>Detention notices demanding duty and interest could not be sustained where the adjudicating authority failed to comply with earlier remand directions requiring verification and quantification of the assessable value and duty liability. The Tribunal noted that the appellant had furnished the required calculations and made deposits, yet the directed verification was not undertaken before further demand was raised. The matter therefore had to be examined afresh by the adjudicating authority after hearing the appellant and completing the quantification exercise. The impugned notices were set aside and the dispute on any remaining duty or interest liability was left open for fresh determination on remand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271045</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>