<?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>2018 (6) TMI 649 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361822</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, ruling that issues related to custody, negligence, and liability for lost goods fall under civil law, outside its jurisdiction. The claim for compensation for lost goods was rejected, affirming that the goods remained in the appellants&#039; custody. The Tribunal emphasized the Customs Act does not provide for compensation for lost goods, underscoring the boundaries of its jurisdiction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Mar 2019 11:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=523592" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (6) TMI 649 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361822</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, ruling that issues related to custody, negligence, and liability for lost goods fall under civil law, outside its jurisdiction. The claim for compensation for lost goods was rejected, affirming that the goods remained in the appellants&#039; custody. The Tribunal emphasized the Customs Act does not provide for compensation for lost goods, underscoring the boundaries of its jurisdiction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361822</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>