<?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>1986 (9) TMI 331 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73351</link>
    <description>The tribunal dismissed the appeal challenging the absolute confiscation of various items, including TV sets and VCR, based on Customs Act provisions. It found that the items were not bona fide baggage of the passenger but imports by a third party, leading to ownership and declaration discrepancies. The tribunal concluded that duty exemptions and baggage rules did not apply in this situation, ultimately upholding the Collector&#039;s confiscation order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 12:40:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=111630" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (9) TMI 331 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73351</link>
      <description>The tribunal dismissed the appeal challenging the absolute confiscation of various items, including TV sets and VCR, based on Customs Act provisions. It found that the items were not bona fide baggage of the passenger but imports by a third party, leading to ownership and declaration discrepancies. The tribunal concluded that duty exemptions and baggage rules did not apply in this situation, ultimately upholding the Collector&#039;s confiscation order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73351</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>