<?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>2000 (9) TMI 879 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102183</link>
    <description>A pre-deposit requirement may be waived where the record shows a strong prima facie challenge to the demand and the validity of the show cause notice. The note highlights objections that 94 consignments of components could not be clubbed as colour television sets, that Rule 2(a) of the Interpretative Rules may not apply to a complex manufacturing process, that a departmental circular under the Customs Act may not be binding, and that limitation may bar the notice absent suppression or fraud. Because the Tribunal gave only a bare refusal of complete waiver and did not reason through these issues, the deposit condition was treated as unjustified and the appeal was to proceed on merits without pre-deposit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 18:44:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139232" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (9) TMI 879 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102183</link>
      <description>A pre-deposit requirement may be waived where the record shows a strong prima facie challenge to the demand and the validity of the show cause notice. The note highlights objections that 94 consignments of components could not be clubbed as colour television sets, that Rule 2(a) of the Interpretative Rules may not apply to a complex manufacturing process, that a departmental circular under the Customs Act may not be binding, and that limitation may bar the notice absent suppression or fraud. Because the Tribunal gave only a bare refusal of complete waiver and did not reason through these issues, the deposit condition was treated as unjustified and the appeal was to proceed on merits without pre-deposit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102183</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>