<?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 (8) TMI 111 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31975</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the classification and confiscation of the Emu birds under Customs Notification No. 23/98 but reduced the fine and penalty imposed. The issue of whether the birds qualified for exemption as &#039;pureline poultry stock&#039; was remanded to the Commissioner for further examination, allowing the appellants to present evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 04 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70620" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 111 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31975</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the classification and confiscation of the Emu birds under Customs Notification No. 23/98 but reduced the fine and penalty imposed. The issue of whether the birds qualified for exemption as &#039;pureline poultry stock&#039; was remanded to the Commissioner for further examination, allowing the appellants to present evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31975</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>