<?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>2000 (9) TMI 86 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46313</link>
    <description>A strong prima facie case was found for waiver of pre-deposit in a customs appeal because the classification dispute itself remained doubtful: whether imported component consignments could be clubbed as colour television sets in CKD/SKD condition, whether Rule 2(a) of the Interpretative Rules supported that approach, and whether the departmental circular on the manufacturing process was binding under Section 151-A of the Customs Act, 1962. The Court also noted substantial prima facie doubt on limitation, including the allegation of suppression for invoking the extended period. As the pre-deposit direction lacked real reasoning and the record showed the departmental case had already been rejected on a different basis, the condition was set aside and the appeal was to be heard on merits without deposit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Jul 2010 11:15:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=84839" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (9) TMI 86 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46313</link>
      <description>A strong prima facie case was found for waiver of pre-deposit in a customs appeal because the classification dispute itself remained doubtful: whether imported component consignments could be clubbed as colour television sets in CKD/SKD condition, whether Rule 2(a) of the Interpretative Rules supported that approach, and whether the departmental circular on the manufacturing process was binding under Section 151-A of the Customs Act, 1962. The Court also noted substantial prima facie doubt on limitation, including the allegation of suppression for invoking the extended period. As the pre-deposit direction lacked real reasoning and the record showed the departmental case had already been rejected on a different basis, the condition was set aside and the appeal was to be heard on merits without deposit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46313</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>