<?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 (8) TMI 849 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236557</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the stay application for waiver and dispensation of pre-deposit and granted a stay against the operation of the Customs Commissioner&#039;s order. The applicants failed to prove they were not the importers of the goods, leading to a pre-deposit order of Rs. 2 crores. The Tribunal emphasized the definition of &quot;importer&quot; under the Customs Act, highlighting ownership and legislative intent. Compliance with the pre-deposit would waive further dues, with non-compliance resulting in appeal dismissal. The decision was based on legal interpretation and factual analysis, upholding the Commissioner&#039;s findings and ordering the pre-deposit while disposing of the stay applications.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Aug 2013 10:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=198964" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (8) TMI 849 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236557</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the stay application for waiver and dispensation of pre-deposit and granted a stay against the operation of the Customs Commissioner&#039;s order. The applicants failed to prove they were not the importers of the goods, leading to a pre-deposit order of Rs. 2 crores. The Tribunal emphasized the definition of &quot;importer&quot; under the Customs Act, highlighting ownership and legislative intent. Compliance with the pre-deposit would waive further dues, with non-compliance resulting in appeal dismissal. The decision was based on legal interpretation and factual analysis, upholding the Commissioner&#039;s findings and ordering the pre-deposit while disposing of the stay applications.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236557</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>