<?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>1999 (4) TMI 213 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91377</link>
    <description>Pending appeal, waiver of pre-deposit was considered appropriate where the dispute over eligibility to Notification No. 64/88-Cus. was arguable and the goods remained under confiscation without redemption. Because the hospital equipment had not been redeemed, deposit of duty was not directed at that stage. The penalty was waived and recovery stayed, with the matter fixed for early hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:17:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128439" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (4) TMI 213 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91377</link>
      <description>Pending appeal, waiver of pre-deposit was considered appropriate where the dispute over eligibility to Notification No. 64/88-Cus. was arguable and the goods remained under confiscation without redemption. Because the hospital equipment had not been redeemed, deposit of duty was not directed at that stage. The penalty was waived and recovery stayed, with the matter fixed for early hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91377</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>