<?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 (6) TMI 108 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91491</link>
    <description>On the language of Notification No. 76/65 and the material before the Tribunal, the appellant was found to have established a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty. As no material was produced to show that the seized silver was silver first exported to Nepal from countries other than India, insistence on pre-deposit was not warranted at that stage. The Tribunal therefore dispensed with the pre-deposit requirement and stayed recovery during pendency of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Oct 2011 13:20:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128553" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (6) TMI 108 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91491</link>
      <description>On the language of Notification No. 76/65 and the material before the Tribunal, the appellant was found to have established a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty. As no material was produced to show that the seized silver was silver first exported to Nepal from countries other than India, insistence on pre-deposit was not warranted at that stage. The Tribunal therefore dispensed with the pre-deposit requirement and stayed recovery during pendency of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91491</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>