<?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 (7) TMI 548 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440275</link>
    <description>Denial of a fair hearing and cross-examination can vitiate customs adjudication where the case rests substantially on recorded statements and documentary material; on that basis, the proceedings against three appellants were set aside and remanded for de novo adjudication with hearing and cross-examination. In the valuation dispute concerning cranes sold on a high-seas basis, the appellant&#039;s statement had to be read as a whole, and the admitted refund showed that the actual consideration was lower than the amount adopted by the adjudicating authority; the resulting valuation and demand were therefore unsustainable and the order was set aside for that appellant. Relief was thus granted to all appellants, with the merits left open in remanded matters.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Jul 2023 16:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=719520" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (7) TMI 548 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440275</link>
      <description>Denial of a fair hearing and cross-examination can vitiate customs adjudication where the case rests substantially on recorded statements and documentary material; on that basis, the proceedings against three appellants were set aside and remanded for de novo adjudication with hearing and cross-examination. In the valuation dispute concerning cranes sold on a high-seas basis, the appellant&#039;s statement had to be read as a whole, and the admitted refund showed that the actual consideration was lower than the amount adopted by the adjudicating authority; the resulting valuation and demand were therefore unsustainable and the order was set aside for that appellant. Relief was thus granted to all appellants, with the merits left open in remanded matters.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440275</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>