<?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>1995 (3) TMI 248 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84260</link>
    <description>The Stay Application filed by M/s. Surekha Coated Tubes &amp;amp; Steels Ltd. seeking waiver of predeposit of customs duty amounting to Rs. 94,86,306 was partially granted. The duty was held recoverable due to non-compliance with exemption conditions, but confiscation of goods and penal action were deemed unwarranted. The case highlighted conflicting decisions on duty liability, with the Tribunal granting a waiver of predeposit subject to the execution of a bond by the appellants. The judgment emphasized the complexities of duty liability under specific exemptions and the jurisdiction of Customs authorities in demanding duty, considering financial hardships faced by the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2011 17:19:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121404" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (3) TMI 248 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84260</link>
      <description>The Stay Application filed by M/s. Surekha Coated Tubes &amp;amp; Steels Ltd. seeking waiver of predeposit of customs duty amounting to Rs. 94,86,306 was partially granted. The duty was held recoverable due to non-compliance with exemption conditions, but confiscation of goods and penal action were deemed unwarranted. The case highlighted conflicting decisions on duty liability, with the Tribunal granting a waiver of predeposit subject to the execution of a bond by the appellants. The judgment emphasized the complexities of duty liability under specific exemptions and the jurisdiction of Customs authorities in demanding duty, considering financial hardships faced by the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84260</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>