<?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>2002 (4) TMI 68 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46235</link>
    <description>The dispute concerned whether electrical resistance alloy could be treated as stainless steel for customs purposes. The Court proceeded on the basis that the Revenue had accepted the appellant&#039;s stand because it was repeatedly given time over several years to obtain instructions but produced none, while the appellant&#039;s Bills of Entry supported that position. On that basis, the appeal was allowed, the impugned judgment and order were set aside, and consequential reliefs and costs were granted to the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2010 16:15:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=84761" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (4) TMI 68 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46235</link>
      <description>The dispute concerned whether electrical resistance alloy could be treated as stainless steel for customs purposes. The Court proceeded on the basis that the Revenue had accepted the appellant&#039;s stand because it was repeatedly given time over several years to obtain instructions but produced none, while the appellant&#039;s Bills of Entry supported that position. On that basis, the appeal was allowed, the impugned judgment and order were set aside, and consequential reliefs and costs were granted to the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46235</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>