<?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 (10) TMI 159 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349004</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, dismissing the appeal. It held that the imported filament yarn was not eligible for the concessional rate of Additional Duty of Customs (ADC) at 8% under Notification No. 29/2004-CE, as the conditions of the notification were not met. The additional duty of customs must be equal to the central excise duty on a like article produced in India, as per the statutory provisions and judicial precedents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2019 14:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=491445" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (10) TMI 159 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349004</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, dismissing the appeal. It held that the imported filament yarn was not eligible for the concessional rate of Additional Duty of Customs (ADC) at 8% under Notification No. 29/2004-CE, as the conditions of the notification were not met. The additional duty of customs must be equal to the central excise duty on a like article produced in India, as per the statutory provisions and judicial precedents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349004</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>