<?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>2024 (4) TMI 636 - CESTAT MUMBAI-LB</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751455</link>
    <description>The Tribunal directed the matter back to the Division Bench to resolve the core issue of whether the appellant consented to the enhanced value for customs duty purposes. The Larger Bench deferred addressing the reference until the Division Bench determines the appellant&#039;s alleged consent, emphasizing the necessity of resolving this pivotal issue prior to proceeding with the appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2024 11:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=750236" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (4) TMI 636 - CESTAT MUMBAI-LB</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751455</link>
      <description>The Tribunal directed the matter back to the Division Bench to resolve the core issue of whether the appellant consented to the enhanced value for customs duty purposes. The Larger Bench deferred addressing the reference until the Division Bench determines the appellant&#039;s alleged consent, emphasizing the necessity of resolving this pivotal issue prior to proceeding with the appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751455</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>