<?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>2001 (2) TMI 234 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50687</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the denial of duty exemption under Notification 159/90, validated the import licenses, and rejected penalties on the importer and supporting manufacturer. Compliance with specific conditions for duty exemption and import license validity is crucial, with the burden of proof on claimants to demonstrate regulatory compliance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Aug 2010 13:38:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89166" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (2) TMI 234 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50687</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the denial of duty exemption under Notification 159/90, validated the import licenses, and rejected penalties on the importer and supporting manufacturer. Compliance with specific conditions for duty exemption and import license validity is crucial, with the burden of proof on claimants to demonstrate regulatory compliance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50687</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>