<?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 (10) TMI 313 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87981</link>
    <description>Stay of an appellate order is not justified merely because the Department disputes the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039; appreciation of evidence or interpretation of the import policy. Where the challenged order rests on evidence evaluation and policy construction, a stay will not be granted unless there is material showing arbitrariness, perversity, or breach of natural justice. On that basis, the applications for stay were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:31:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=125047" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (10) TMI 313 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87981</link>
      <description>Stay of an appellate order is not justified merely because the Department disputes the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039; appreciation of evidence or interpretation of the import policy. Where the challenged order rests on evidence evaluation and policy construction, a stay will not be granted unless there is material showing arbitrariness, perversity, or breach of natural justice. On that basis, the applications for stay were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87981</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>