<?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>2008 (4) TMI 226 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31315</link>
    <description>Proof of re-export of a container defeated the duty demand and penalty because the appellate authority accepted the evidence of re-export and set aside the levy. The refusal of further extension by the original authority did not justify sustaining duty once re-export was established within the proceedings. On that basis, the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed and the demand was held unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=69963" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (4) TMI 226 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31315</link>
      <description>Proof of re-export of a container defeated the duty demand and penalty because the appellate authority accepted the evidence of re-export and set aside the levy. The refusal of further extension by the original authority did not justify sustaining duty once re-export was established within the proceedings. On that basis, the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed and the demand was held unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31315</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>