<?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>1994 (2) TMI 164 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83081</link>
    <description>Imported Gambiar Booch was treated as commonly synonymous with indigenous Katha on the evidence relied on by the Tribunal, including standard publications and technical references, and their uses were found similar. On that basis, the Tribunal followed its earlier final order on the same product and held that the goods qualified for exemption from countervailing duty under Notification No. 104/82.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Jul 2011 13:30:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=120226" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (2) TMI 164 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83081</link>
      <description>Imported Gambiar Booch was treated as commonly synonymous with indigenous Katha on the evidence relied on by the Tribunal, including standard publications and technical references, and their uses were found similar. On that basis, the Tribunal followed its earlier final order on the same product and held that the goods qualified for exemption from countervailing duty under Notification No. 104/82.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83081</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>