<?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>2009 (3) TMI 479 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76601</link>
    <description>Eight consignments cleared under a DFRC licence were held not to involve misdeclaration because the goods were declared as glazed glass, supported by manufacturer invoices, and examined by Customs before clearance; the subsequent duty demand and penalties were therefore set aside as time barred and unjustified. For the seized consignment, the Tribunal found that the issues on merits and limitation required reconsideration and remitted the matter to the Commissioner for fresh adjudication after hearing both sides.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=114803" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (3) TMI 479 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76601</link>
      <description>Eight consignments cleared under a DFRC licence were held not to involve misdeclaration because the goods were declared as glazed glass, supported by manufacturer invoices, and examined by Customs before clearance; the subsequent duty demand and penalties were therefore set aside as time barred and unjustified. For the seized consignment, the Tribunal found that the issues on merits and limitation required reconsideration and remitted the matter to the Commissioner for fresh adjudication after hearing both sides.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76601</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>