<?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 (4) TMI 613 - CEGAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100036</link>
    <description>The tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the confiscation of silk yarn and penalties imposed on the appellants. Emphasizing the burden of proof on the department, it noted the lack of evidence establishing illicit importation. The tribunal criticized the reliance on assumptions and lack of thorough investigations, highlighting the necessity of concrete evidence in smuggling cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 10:19:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=137087" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (4) TMI 613 - CEGAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100036</link>
      <description>The tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the confiscation of silk yarn and penalties imposed on the appellants. Emphasizing the burden of proof on the department, it noted the lack of evidence establishing illicit importation. The tribunal criticized the reliance on assumptions and lack of thorough investigations, highlighting the necessity of concrete evidence in smuggling cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100036</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>