<?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>2010 (8) TMI 908 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170449</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed as the appellant successfully demonstrated the payment of duty through a certificate from the Asst. Commissioner of Customs, resulting in the Cenvat credit of CVD being granted for the re-imported goods. The Revenue&#039;s insufficient evidence led to the impugned order being set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 May 2015 10:43:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=386249" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (8) TMI 908 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170449</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed as the appellant successfully demonstrated the payment of duty through a certificate from the Asst. Commissioner of Customs, resulting in the Cenvat credit of CVD being granted for the re-imported goods. The Revenue&#039;s insufficient evidence led to the impugned order being set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170449</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>