<?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 (8) TMI 670 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78014</link>
    <description>Expert opinion under Section 45 of the Evidence Act is relevant but not conclusive, and it cannot by itself displace documentary material showing local manufacture and purchase. The Tribunal accepted challans, purchase particulars, and local producer records as reliable factual evidence, while the department relied mainly on expert opinion that some bundles were of Chinese origin and produced no further corroboration or verification of the documents. On that basis, the Tribunal&#039;s factual finding that the silk yarn was of Indian origin was upheld, and no substantial question of law arose for revisional interference.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116158" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (8) TMI 670 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78014</link>
      <description>Expert opinion under Section 45 of the Evidence Act is relevant but not conclusive, and it cannot by itself displace documentary material showing local manufacture and purchase. The Tribunal accepted challans, purchase particulars, and local producer records as reliable factual evidence, while the department relied mainly on expert opinion that some bundles were of Chinese origin and produced no further corroboration or verification of the documents. On that basis, the Tribunal&#039;s factual finding that the silk yarn was of Indian origin was upheld, and no substantial question of law arose for revisional interference.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78014</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>