<?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>2001 (6) TMI 543 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99553</link>
    <description>Export of calamus roots was not liable to confiscation where the later public notice confined the export restriction to plants and goods obtained from the wild, and the consignment was supported by a horticulture certificate stating that the roots were cultivated. On that basis, the goods did not fall within the negative list as applied after the amendment, so the confiscation order and its appellate affirmation could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 17:46:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136605" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (6) TMI 543 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99553</link>
      <description>Export of calamus roots was not liable to confiscation where the later public notice confined the export restriction to plants and goods obtained from the wild, and the consignment was supported by a horticulture certificate stating that the roots were cultivated. On that basis, the goods did not fall within the negative list as applied after the amendment, so the confiscation order and its appellate affirmation could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99553</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>