<?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 (6) TMI 146 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395771</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the case for re-adjudication within three months. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a detailed examination of each software import to determine if they qualified as &quot;packaged software&quot; subject to assessment based on MRP/RSP, criticizing the lack of analysis by the adjudicating authority in the initial decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2020 11:09:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=614629" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (6) TMI 146 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395771</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the case for re-adjudication within three months. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a detailed examination of each software import to determine if they qualified as &quot;packaged software&quot; subject to assessment based on MRP/RSP, criticizing the lack of analysis by the adjudicating authority in the initial decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395771</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>