<?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 (3) TMI 424 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393280</link>
    <description>The Tribunal confirmed the appellant&#039;s liability to pay duty at the debonding rate, not the import rate, as per relevant notifications and the Customs Act. Additionally, the appellant was found not liable to pay interest for the period when capital goods were warehoused, in line with an exemption notification. The Revenue was directed to calculate the duty at the debonding rate, with any payable amount to be settled within one month, effectively disposing of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Oct 2021 14:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=606453" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (3) TMI 424 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393280</link>
      <description>The Tribunal confirmed the appellant&#039;s liability to pay duty at the debonding rate, not the import rate, as per relevant notifications and the Customs Act. Additionally, the appellant was found not liable to pay interest for the period when capital goods were warehoused, in line with an exemption notification. The Revenue was directed to calculate the duty at the debonding rate, with any payable amount to be settled within one month, effectively disposing of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393280</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>