<?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>2020 (1) TMI 434 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390821</link>
    <description>A communication rejecting conversion of shipping bills was treated as an appealable order because the substantive decision had been taken by the Commissioner and the Assistant Commissioner merely conveyed that decision. A letter that finally determines the rights of an assessee can be challenged before the Tribunal. Applying that principle, the objection that the appeal was not maintainable was rejected, and the appeal was held maintainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Jan 2020 07:46:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=600084" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (1) TMI 434 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390821</link>
      <description>A communication rejecting conversion of shipping bills was treated as an appealable order because the substantive decision had been taken by the Commissioner and the Assistant Commissioner merely conveyed that decision. A letter that finally determines the rights of an assessee can be challenged before the Tribunal. Applying that principle, the objection that the appeal was not maintainable was rejected, and the appeal was held maintainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390821</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>