<?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 (5) TMI 187 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327206</link>
    <description>The appellate tribunal held that the appellant was not liable to pay rent for goods stored at a CWC warehouse as the adjudication order only required payment of redemption fine, penalties, and duty. Since the appellant paid the rent under protest and had no obligation to do so, the tribunal deemed the amount refundable. The tribunal set aside the denial of the refund claim and allowed the appeal, providing consequential relief to the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Oct 2016 15:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=426838" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 187 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327206</link>
      <description>The appellate tribunal held that the appellant was not liable to pay rent for goods stored at a CWC warehouse as the adjudication order only required payment of redemption fine, penalties, and duty. Since the appellant paid the rent under protest and had no obligation to do so, the tribunal deemed the amount refundable. The tribunal set aside the denial of the refund claim and allowed the appeal, providing consequential relief to the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327206</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>