<?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>2002 (2) TMI 1263 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108420</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Kolkata allowed the appeal, setting aside the confiscation order of raw silk yarns. The tribunal found that the authorities failed to prove the goods were of foreign origin and smuggled, as required by the Revenue. Since the yarn was a non-notified item, the tribunal held that the onus to prove smuggling lay with the Revenue, which was not satisfactorily discharged.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Mar 2012 13:58:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=145437" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (2) TMI 1263 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108420</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Kolkata allowed the appeal, setting aside the confiscation order of raw silk yarns. The tribunal found that the authorities failed to prove the goods were of foreign origin and smuggled, as required by the Revenue. Since the yarn was a non-notified item, the tribunal held that the onus to prove smuggling lay with the Revenue, which was not satisfactorily discharged.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108420</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>