<?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>2006 (4) TMI 376 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119143</link>
    <description>A dispute finally decided on the same contract and same legal foundation could not be reopened for a later consignment, because the earlier determination had attained finality and operated as res judicata. The public notice was treated as prospective, so an import under an earlier contract and letter of credit was not hit by that later clarification. On that basis, the importer&#039;s bona fide conduct under the prevailing policy position supported the view that confiscation and penalty lacked legal basis and were not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Jul 2012 13:03:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156140" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (4) TMI 376 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119143</link>
      <description>A dispute finally decided on the same contract and same legal foundation could not be reopened for a later consignment, because the earlier determination had attained finality and operated as res judicata. The public notice was treated as prospective, so an import under an earlier contract and letter of credit was not hit by that later clarification. On that basis, the importer&#039;s bona fide conduct under the prevailing policy position supported the view that confiscation and penalty lacked legal basis and were not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119143</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>