Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2019 (8) TMI 1167

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Assistant Commissioner (AR), for the Appellant None for the Respondent ORDER Per: Ramesh Nair The Revenue filed the present appeal seeking confiscation of goods removed illicitly and consequent redemption fine. 2. Shri K.J. Kinariwala, Ld. Assistant Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue submits that the unit is a 100% EOU and working as bonded warehouse for which B-1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ports vs. CC, Mumbai/Jaipur (e) 2017 (355) ELT 193 (Bom.) - Unimark Remedies Limited vs. CCE (Export Promotion) Mumbai. 3. None appeared on behalf of the respondent despite notices. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions and perused the record. We find that ld. Commissioner (Appeals) did not confiscate the goods on the ground that the same was not available for confiscation....