<?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>2014 (1) TMI 381 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242157</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed, and the impugned goods confiscated were sold in an auction. The applicant sought the return of the actual value of the goods, but the Revenue argued that the goods were sold due to depreciation. As the goods were confiscated and sold through a public auction, the applicant was directed to collect the auction amount, resulting in the dismissal of the application.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Jan 2014 09:42:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=342051" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 381 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242157</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed, and the impugned goods confiscated were sold in an auction. The applicant sought the return of the actual value of the goods, but the Revenue argued that the goods were sold due to depreciation. As the goods were confiscated and sold through a public auction, the applicant was directed to collect the auction amount, resulting in the dismissal of the application.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242157</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>