<?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>1991 (10) TMI 180 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99636</link>
    <description>Imported goods were held eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 172/77-Cus. because they were materially similar to goods covered by an earlier Tribunal decision in the appellant&#039;s own case. The Tribunal applied its prior ruling, finding no basis to depart from that view where the factual matrix was substantially identical. On that footing, the notification benefit was available to the imports in question.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Oct 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2012 11:50:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136688" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (10) TMI 180 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99636</link>
      <description>Imported goods were held eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 172/77-Cus. because they were materially similar to goods covered by an earlier Tribunal decision in the appellant&#039;s own case. The Tribunal applied its prior ruling, finding no basis to depart from that view where the factual matrix was substantially identical. On that footing, the notification benefit was available to the imports in question.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Oct 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99636</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>