<?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>2003 (7) TMI 593 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109904</link>
    <description>The judge allowed the stay application for waiver of duty, noting the appellants&#039; strong prima facie case. Regarding the alleged clandestine removal of goods without duty payment, the judge found the presumption lacking legal basis due to insufficient evidence. Emphasizing the necessity of tangible evidence for such charges, the judge set aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order, allowing the appeal with any consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2012 17:21:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=146920" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (7) TMI 593 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109904</link>
      <description>The judge allowed the stay application for waiver of duty, noting the appellants&#039; strong prima facie case. Regarding the alleged clandestine removal of goods without duty payment, the judge found the presumption lacking legal basis due to insufficient evidence. Emphasizing the necessity of tangible evidence for such charges, the judge set aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order, allowing the appeal with any consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109904</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>