<?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>1996 (3) TMI 243 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85213</link>
    <description>A confiscation order based on the absence of an import licence could not stand where a valid licence covering the shipped goods was produced after adjudication. The later licence had to be examined because the matter could not be treated as finally concluded without considering its effect on the import. The confiscation order was therefore set aside and the case remanded for fresh adjudication with the licence taken into account, leaving the merits open.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2011 14:41:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122280" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (3) TMI 243 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85213</link>
      <description>A confiscation order based on the absence of an import licence could not stand where a valid licence covering the shipped goods was produced after adjudication. The later licence had to be examined because the matter could not be treated as finally concluded without considering its effect on the import. The confiscation order was therefore set aside and the case remanded for fresh adjudication with the licence taken into account, leaving the merits open.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85213</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>