<?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>2013 (4) TMI 60 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221864</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside confiscation orders for scrap batteries and a truck, as Revenue failed to prove smuggling from Nepal solely based on the driver&#039;s statement. Emphasizing the need for corroborative evidence, the Tribunal rejected confiscation due to lack of direct proof of foreign origin. Penalties on the appellants were revoked as no evidence supported smuggling allegations, aligning with the annulment of confiscation orders.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2013 07:24:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=195216" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (4) TMI 60 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221864</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside confiscation orders for scrap batteries and a truck, as Revenue failed to prove smuggling from Nepal solely based on the driver&#039;s statement. Emphasizing the need for corroborative evidence, the Tribunal rejected confiscation due to lack of direct proof of foreign origin. Penalties on the appellants were revoked as no evidence supported smuggling allegations, aligning with the annulment of confiscation orders.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221864</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>