<?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>1985 (5) TMI 240 - CEGAT MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167570</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed both appeals, rejecting the appellant&#039;s confessional statement as involuntary, finding the presumption under Section 123 of the Customs Act inapplicable, and deeming the evidence insufficient to prove the charges. Consequently, the penalties imposed under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act and Section 74 of the Gold Control Act were vacated, giving the appellant the benefit of doubt.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2014 17:54:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=372070" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (5) TMI 240 - CEGAT MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167570</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed both appeals, rejecting the appellant&#039;s confessional statement as involuntary, finding the presumption under Section 123 of the Customs Act inapplicable, and deeming the evidence insufficient to prove the charges. Consequently, the penalties imposed under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act and Section 74 of the Gold Control Act were vacated, giving the appellant the benefit of doubt.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167570</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>