<?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>2011 (5) TMI 709 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211167</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the duty demand of Rs. 2,33,52,317/- against the EOU for failing to meet export obligations, confiscating capital goods, and imposing penalties. The show-cause notice was deemed valid, justifying the duty demand due to non-compliance with bond requirements and export obligations. Confiscation was set aside as it was not warranted, and the penalty was also revoked. The matter was remanded for re-evaluation of duty liability, interest, and consideration of depreciation by the original adjudicating authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Mar 2012 11:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=184591" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (5) TMI 709 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211167</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the duty demand of Rs. 2,33,52,317/- against the EOU for failing to meet export obligations, confiscating capital goods, and imposing penalties. The show-cause notice was deemed valid, justifying the duty demand due to non-compliance with bond requirements and export obligations. Confiscation was set aside as it was not warranted, and the penalty was also revoked. The matter was remanded for re-evaluation of duty liability, interest, and consideration of depreciation by the original adjudicating authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211167</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>