<?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 (5) TMI 347 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437540</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that the Deputy Commissioner was not competent to decide on the release of seized goods and the refund of monetary proceeds of silver. The matter was remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeal) for further consideration, emphasizing the need for adherence to procedural requirements and proper authority in making such decisions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 May 2023 08:06:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=713078" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (5) TMI 347 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437540</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that the Deputy Commissioner was not competent to decide on the release of seized goods and the refund of monetary proceeds of silver. The matter was remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeal) for further consideration, emphasizing the need for adherence to procedural requirements and proper authority in making such decisions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437540</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>