<?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>2007 (5) TMI 494 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122329</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s decision in an appeal challenging the order related to seized silk fabrics. The Tribunal emphasized the burden of proof on departmental authorities to establish goods are smuggled, rather than on appellants to disprove. Lack of substantial evidence from the Revenue led to the appeal&#039;s dismissal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Aug 2012 14:07:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=159316" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (5) TMI 494 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122329</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s decision in an appeal challenging the order related to seized silk fabrics. The Tribunal emphasized the burden of proof on departmental authorities to establish goods are smuggled, rather than on appellants to disprove. Lack of substantial evidence from the Revenue led to the appeal&#039;s dismissal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122329</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>