<?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>1985 (5) TMI 149 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72299</link>
    <description>Imported prohibited goods attract mandatory customs consequences: the penalty framework under the Customs Act could not be reduced below the prescribed minimum where the imposed penalty was already within the statutory range. The adjudicating authority therefore had no legal basis to reduce the personal penalty. Absolute confiscation of the watches was also sustained because confiscation of prohibited goods remained a matter of discretion under the Act, and no impropriety in that discretion was shown. The result was that neither reduction of penalty nor conversion of confiscation into redemption on fine was warranted, and the adjudication order was left undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 May 2011 13:05:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=110578" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (5) TMI 149 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72299</link>
      <description>Imported prohibited goods attract mandatory customs consequences: the penalty framework under the Customs Act could not be reduced below the prescribed minimum where the imposed penalty was already within the statutory range. The adjudicating authority therefore had no legal basis to reduce the personal penalty. Absolute confiscation of the watches was also sustained because confiscation of prohibited goods remained a matter of discretion under the Act, and no impropriety in that discretion was shown. The result was that neither reduction of penalty nor conversion of confiscation into redemption on fine was warranted, and the adjudication order was left undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72299</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>