<?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 (12) TMI 176 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351907</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed both appeals in favor of the appellant, overturning the original order. It emphasized the lack of concrete evidence supporting the Revenue&#039;s arguments and highlighted substantial evidence presented by the appellant regarding the classification and use of the imported metallic rims. The Tribunal noted conflicting expert opinions and ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the importance of the benefit of doubt in such situations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2019 14:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=498529" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 176 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351907</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed both appeals in favor of the appellant, overturning the original order. It emphasized the lack of concrete evidence supporting the Revenue&#039;s arguments and highlighted substantial evidence presented by the appellant regarding the classification and use of the imported metallic rims. The Tribunal noted conflicting expert opinions and ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the importance of the benefit of doubt in such situations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351907</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>