<?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>2021 (11) TMI 491 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414710</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant, setting aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). It held that the extended period of limitation under Section 28(4) of the Customs Act was not applicable as there was no deliberate suppression of facts by the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Nov 2021 14:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=661123" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (11) TMI 491 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414710</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant, setting aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). It held that the extended period of limitation under Section 28(4) of the Customs Act was not applicable as there was no deliberate suppression of facts by the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414710</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>