<?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>2023 (4) TMI 784 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436758</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the exchange rate for valuation of imports should be the rate prevailing at the time the warehousing bill of entry was filed. Therefore, the demand for customs duty based on the exchange rate at the time of filing ex-bond bill of entry was not sustainable, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Apr 2023 10:01:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=711217" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (4) TMI 784 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436758</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the exchange rate for valuation of imports should be the rate prevailing at the time the warehousing bill of entry was filed. Therefore, the demand for customs duty based on the exchange rate at the time of filing ex-bond bill of entry was not sustainable, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436758</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>