<?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>2026 (4) TMI 169 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789100</link>
    <description>An imported &quot;interactive flat panel display&quot; classification dispute was not adjudicated on merits because the civil appeal was dismissed after counsel stated that a similar issue had already been considered and dismissed by the SC. The matter therefore turned on the existing treatment of the same classification question, rather than any fresh determination of the burden of proof or the goods&#039; classification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2026 08:49:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=894804" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (4) TMI 169 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789100</link>
      <description>An imported &quot;interactive flat panel display&quot; classification dispute was not adjudicated on merits because the civil appeal was dismissed after counsel stated that a similar issue had already been considered and dismissed by the SC. The matter therefore turned on the existing treatment of the same classification question, rather than any fresh determination of the burden of proof or the goods&#039; classification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789100</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>