<?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 (5) TMI 604 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122460</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that the appellants had provided sufficient proof of export and had complied with the substantive conditions, thereby setting aside the duty demand and penalty imposed by the authorities. The majority decision allowed the appeal, concluding that the non-production of the quadruplicate copy of the invoice did not invalidate the proof of export submitted by the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2012 18:00:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=159445" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (5) TMI 604 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122460</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that the appellants had provided sufficient proof of export and had complied with the substantive conditions, thereby setting aside the duty demand and penalty imposed by the authorities. The majority decision allowed the appeal, concluding that the non-production of the quadruplicate copy of the invoice did not invalidate the proof of export submitted by the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122460</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>