<?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>2010 (10) TMI 142 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202192</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the appellant was not entitled to duty benefit under the DEPB scheme against fraudulently obtained DEPB scrips. The duty demand, interest, and confiscation of the impugned goods were upheld, while penalties were set aside. The appeal by the appellant was dismissed, and the Department&#039;s appeal was partly allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 18:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=175781" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (10) TMI 142 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202192</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the appellant was not entitled to duty benefit under the DEPB scheme against fraudulently obtained DEPB scrips. The duty demand, interest, and confiscation of the impugned goods were upheld, while penalties were set aside. The appeal by the appellant was dismissed, and the Department&#039;s appeal was partly allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202192</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>