<?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 (11) TMI 441 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400686</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s order with the modification that the gold bars should also be confiscated under Section 111(d). The appeal by the Revenue was allowed to this extent, while the rest of the prayers were rejected. The appeal by Shri Amanullah was rejected in its entirety.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2021 12:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=627710" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (11) TMI 441 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400686</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s order with the modification that the gold bars should also be confiscated under Section 111(d). The appeal by the Revenue was allowed to this extent, while the rest of the prayers were rejected. The appeal by Shri Amanullah was rejected in its entirety.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400686</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>