<?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>2017 (7) TMI 628 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345516</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the department&#039;s appeal in a customs case, ruling that the liability to pay interest on differential duty in provisional assessment applies only from the date of the amendment to the Customs Act, not retrospectively. The Tribunal found that the demand for interest on differential duty from the date of provisional assessment was not legally valid, leading to the dismissal of the department&#039;s appeal. The importer&#039;s request to adjust excess paid duty against short paid duty was denied, and a previous decision in favor of the importer regarding duty demand adjustments against refunds was not revisited in this judgment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Jul 2017 07:35:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=481990" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 628 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345516</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the department&#039;s appeal in a customs case, ruling that the liability to pay interest on differential duty in provisional assessment applies only from the date of the amendment to the Customs Act, not retrospectively. The Tribunal found that the demand for interest on differential duty from the date of provisional assessment was not legally valid, leading to the dismissal of the department&#039;s appeal. The importer&#039;s request to adjust excess paid duty against short paid duty was denied, and a previous decision in favor of the importer regarding duty demand adjustments against refunds was not revisited in this judgment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345516</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>