<?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>2004 (3) TMI 538 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111540</link>
    <description>In the absence of proof that the adjudication order was served by certified copy, delay in filing the appeal was not presumed and condonation was unnecessary. For interim relief at the pre-deposit stage, the appellant&#039;s earlier acquittal on the same facts and doubts about statements recorded in customs custody supported a prima facie case, so pre-deposit of the penalty and recovery were stayed. The appeal was left to proceed on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2012 18:50:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148556" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (3) TMI 538 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111540</link>
      <description>In the absence of proof that the adjudication order was served by certified copy, delay in filing the appeal was not presumed and condonation was unnecessary. For interim relief at the pre-deposit stage, the appellant&#039;s earlier acquittal on the same facts and doubts about statements recorded in customs custody supported a prima facie case, so pre-deposit of the penalty and recovery were stayed. The appeal was left to proceed on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111540</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>