<?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>2002 (2) TMI 265 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51396</link>
    <description>A refund claim for short-shipped goods cannot be rejected at the threshold merely because the survey was conducted after the goods had left customs charge or had been cleared on payment of duty. The Tribunal held that the adjudicating authority must examine the evidence produced to establish short-shipment or short-receipt before deciding the claim. The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication on the material evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Sep 2010 15:43:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89874" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (2) TMI 265 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51396</link>
      <description>A refund claim for short-shipped goods cannot be rejected at the threshold merely because the survey was conducted after the goods had left customs charge or had been cleared on payment of duty. The Tribunal held that the adjudicating authority must examine the evidence produced to establish short-shipment or short-receipt before deciding the claim. The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication on the material evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51396</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>