<?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 (8) TMI 1697 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366225</link>
    <description>The Tribunal remanded the case to the original authority for verification, noting that the original Bills of Entry were not required for refund approval. The rejection of the Chartered Accountant&#039;s certificate was directed to be reconsidered by the adjudicating authority, emphasizing the need to review it in light of relevant precedents. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed for further consideration by the adjudicating authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2018 08:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=532631" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 1697 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366225</link>
      <description>The Tribunal remanded the case to the original authority for verification, noting that the original Bills of Entry were not required for refund approval. The rejection of the Chartered Accountant&#039;s certificate was directed to be reconsidered by the adjudicating authority, emphasizing the need to review it in light of relevant precedents. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed for further consideration by the adjudicating authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366225</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>