<?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 (5) TMI 96 - CEGAT, COURT NO. I, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49847</link>
    <description>The Tribunal modified the impugned order by vacating the penalty on the Managing Director, limiting the penalty on the company, adjusting interest payable, and upholding the penalty imposed due to attempted revenue evasion. The Tribunal rejected the contention that the earlier duty deposit exonerated the appellant from further liability and disposed of the appeals accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Aug 2010 17:48:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=88327" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (5) TMI 96 - CEGAT, COURT NO. I, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49847</link>
      <description>The Tribunal modified the impugned order by vacating the penalty on the Managing Director, limiting the penalty on the company, adjusting interest payable, and upholding the penalty imposed due to attempted revenue evasion. The Tribunal rejected the contention that the earlier duty deposit exonerated the appellant from further liability and disposed of the appeals accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49847</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>