<?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>2016 (1) TMI 725 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270933</link>
    <description>On the peculiar facts, the High Court had decided in favour of the assessee and thereby affirmed the CEGAT order. The Supreme Court noted that no question of law arose and that the penalty was negligible. The appeal was therefore dismissed, with the matter treated as fact-specific rather than raising any substantial legal issue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2016 08:00:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=413662" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (1) TMI 725 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270933</link>
      <description>On the peculiar facts, the High Court had decided in favour of the assessee and thereby affirmed the CEGAT order. The Supreme Court noted that no question of law arose and that the penalty was negligible. The appeal was therefore dismissed, with the matter treated as fact-specific rather than raising any substantial legal issue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270933</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>