<?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 (9) TMI 462 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117007</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals of S/Shri Manharlal Vora, Shalin Vora, and Ashwin Mehta, setting aside the penalties imposed on them and holding that the demand for differential duty should have been confirmed on the actual importers, Niki Traders and Deep Corp., who were not in appeal before the Tribunal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Jun 2012 15:19:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=154005" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (9) TMI 462 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117007</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals of S/Shri Manharlal Vora, Shalin Vora, and Ashwin Mehta, setting aside the penalties imposed on them and holding that the demand for differential duty should have been confirmed on the actual importers, Niki Traders and Deep Corp., who were not in appeal before the Tribunal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117007</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>