<?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 (4) TMI 97 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50004</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found no evidence of unauthorized gold removal and emphasized the Department&#039;s failure to establish the allegation. It noted the lack of specific findings under Section 112 and the absence of duty liability on the imported gold. The penalties imposed were set aside, ruling in favor of the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Aug 2010 10:52:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=88484" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (4) TMI 97 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50004</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found no evidence of unauthorized gold removal and emphasized the Department&#039;s failure to establish the allegation. It noted the lack of specific findings under Section 112 and the absence of duty liability on the imported gold. The penalties imposed were set aside, ruling in favor of the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50004</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>