<?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>2005 (3) TMI 567 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115231</link>
    <description>The appeals were allowed, directing the return of DEEC books and entry of unregistered exports. The duty demands were set aside, and no penalties were imposed under the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal stressed the significance of fulfilling export obligations under the DEEC Scheme and upheld the authority of the DGFT in determining compliance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 18:32:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152230" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (3) TMI 567 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115231</link>
      <description>The appeals were allowed, directing the return of DEEC books and entry of unregistered exports. The duty demands were set aside, and no penalties were imposed under the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal stressed the significance of fulfilling export obligations under the DEEC Scheme and upheld the authority of the DGFT in determining compliance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115231</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>