<?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 (1) TMI 1480 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195981</link>
    <description>A customs circular classifying tablet computers under Heading 8471 was treated as prospective only because the imports had occurred before the circular was issued. In the absence of express retrospective authorisation, a fiscal circular or levy cannot be applied to earlier periods to impose additional duty. The demand for the prior period was therefore not sustainable, while the benefit arising from the classification guidance was confined to the period covered by the circular.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Nov 2017 06:47:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=496333" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 1480 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195981</link>
      <description>A customs circular classifying tablet computers under Heading 8471 was treated as prospective only because the imports had occurred before the circular was issued. In the absence of express retrospective authorisation, a fiscal circular or levy cannot be applied to earlier periods to impose additional duty. The demand for the prior period was therefore not sustainable, while the benefit arising from the classification guidance was confined to the period covered by the circular.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195981</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>