<?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 (11) TMI 838 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445947</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the case to the adjudicating authority for a new decision, emphasizing the need to await the DGFT&#039;s response to the appellant&#039;s import authorization application. The Tribunal instructed the authority to consider the legal distinction between prohibited and restricted goods, leaving all contentions open and effectively allowing the appeal by remand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Aug 2024 16:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=732659" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (11) TMI 838 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445947</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the case to the adjudicating authority for a new decision, emphasizing the need to await the DGFT&#039;s response to the appellant&#039;s import authorization application. The Tribunal instructed the authority to consider the legal distinction between prohibited and restricted goods, leaving all contentions open and effectively allowing the appeal by remand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445947</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>