<?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>2007 (12) TMI 499 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185799</link>
    <description>Where an exemption notification is applicable on the facts, the authority must consider its benefit even if it was not initially claimed. The Bombay High Court also noted that the Tribunal had jurisdiction to condone delay, and that the age of the import and surrounding circumstances showed sufficient cause for the delay. The delay was therefore condoned, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2016 10:44:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=439398" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (12) TMI 499 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185799</link>
      <description>Where an exemption notification is applicable on the facts, the authority must consider its benefit even if it was not initially claimed. The Bombay High Court also noted that the Tribunal had jurisdiction to condone delay, and that the age of the import and surrounding circumstances showed sufficient cause for the delay. The delay was therefore condoned, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185799</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>