<?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 (4) TMI 459 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113429</link>
    <description>An exemption demand based on alleged breach of Notification No. 203/92-Cus. could not be sustained where the record contained no material proving that the transferor had availed input stage credit under Rule 57A. The alleged contravention rested on presumption rather than evidence, so the finding of violation was unsustainable. The confirmed duty demand and connected penalty were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 12:44:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150435" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (4) TMI 459 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113429</link>
      <description>An exemption demand based on alleged breach of Notification No. 203/92-Cus. could not be sustained where the record contained no material proving that the transferor had availed input stage credit under Rule 57A. The alleged contravention rested on presumption rather than evidence, so the finding of violation was unsustainable. The confirmed duty demand and connected penalty were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113429</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>