<?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 (10) TMI 110 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333090</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the order passed by the commissioner of Customs (Appeals) New Delhi regarding the classification of sunglasses under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. It found that the issue had already been settled in a previous case involving the same appellant, which the Department had accepted without filing an appeal. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, noting that the classification issue had been conclusively resolved in the earlier decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 02 Oct 2016 23:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=443655" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (10) TMI 110 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333090</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the order passed by the commissioner of Customs (Appeals) New Delhi regarding the classification of sunglasses under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. It found that the issue had already been settled in a previous case involving the same appellant, which the Department had accepted without filing an appeal. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, noting that the classification issue had been conclusively resolved in the earlier decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333090</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>