<?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 (3) TMI 648 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124189</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the confiscation of diamonds and associated penalties while upholding the confiscation of foreign currency. The decision was based on the Division Bench&#039;s ruling and the lack of evidence proving smuggling post de-notification. The judgment, pronounced on 16-3-2007, granted relief to the appellant in accordance with legal principles and evidence presented during the proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:51:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=161144" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (3) TMI 648 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124189</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the confiscation of diamonds and associated penalties while upholding the confiscation of foreign currency. The decision was based on the Division Bench&#039;s ruling and the lack of evidence proving smuggling post de-notification. The judgment, pronounced on 16-3-2007, granted relief to the appellant in accordance with legal principles and evidence presented during the proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124189</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>