<?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>2020 (9) TMI 525 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398406</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision for the provisional release of Betel Nuts &amp;amp; Black Peppers, finding no evidence of smuggling in the domestic movement of the goods. Despite the revenue&#039;s arguments regarding the seizure of Poppy Seeds and a related court decision, the Tribunal criticized the revenue for detaining the goods without sufficient evidence. The revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed, and they were directed to release the goods to the respondent. The Tribunal&#039;s decision was based on the interpretation of the Customs Act, 1962, and the inapplicability of the cited case law to the goods in question.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2020 11:21:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=622267" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (9) TMI 525 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398406</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision for the provisional release of Betel Nuts &amp;amp; Black Peppers, finding no evidence of smuggling in the domestic movement of the goods. Despite the revenue&#039;s arguments regarding the seizure of Poppy Seeds and a related court decision, the Tribunal criticized the revenue for detaining the goods without sufficient evidence. The revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed, and they were directed to release the goods to the respondent. The Tribunal&#039;s decision was based on the interpretation of the Customs Act, 1962, and the inapplicability of the cited case law to the goods in question.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398406</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>