<?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>1998 (8) TMI 186 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89168</link>
    <description>Concessional customs benefit under Notification No. 224/85-Cus. was contingent on proof that the imported goods were intended for use in the leather industry. The importer was given a specific opportunity to produce evidence of the required end use, but no evidence was adduced. On that record, the condition for the notification was not established, and the claim to exemption failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2011 17:59:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126231" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (8) TMI 186 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89168</link>
      <description>Concessional customs benefit under Notification No. 224/85-Cus. was contingent on proof that the imported goods were intended for use in the leather industry. The importer was given a specific opportunity to produce evidence of the required end use, but no evidence was adduced. On that record, the condition for the notification was not established, and the claim to exemption failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89168</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>