<?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>2015 (11) TMI 682 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267873</link>
    <description>The Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision in a customs case involving the alleged creation of a fictitious company for exporting common salt to claim an ineligible drawback amount. The Court found that the co-accused&#039;s confession alone was insufficient to implicate the first respondent in the activities, leading to the dismissal of the appeal without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2015 05:50:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=405354" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (11) TMI 682 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267873</link>
      <description>The Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision in a customs case involving the alleged creation of a fictitious company for exporting common salt to claim an ineligible drawback amount. The Court found that the co-accused&#039;s confession alone was insufficient to implicate the first respondent in the activities, leading to the dismissal of the appeal without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267873</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>