<?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>2019 (9) TMI 229 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385461</link>
    <description>SC held that appeals from CESTAT orders concerning violation of customs exemption notification conditions lie before HC under Section 130 of Customs Act, not before SC under Section 130E. Appeals to SC are limited to cases involving rate of duty determination or goods valuation for assessment purposes. Since the case involved only breach of notification conditions without duty rate or valuation questions, HC was the appropriate forum. The HC erred in declining jurisdiction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2025 14:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=586211" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 229 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385461</link>
      <description>SC held that appeals from CESTAT orders concerning violation of customs exemption notification conditions lie before HC under Section 130 of Customs Act, not before SC under Section 130E. Appeals to SC are limited to cases involving rate of duty determination or goods valuation for assessment purposes. Since the case involved only breach of notification conditions without duty rate or valuation questions, HC was the appropriate forum. The HC erred in declining jurisdiction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385461</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>