<?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>1994 (10) TMI 183 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83938</link>
    <description>Imported cloves found unfit for human consumption were treated as confiscable, but the import policy allowed consideration of re-export and replacement of defective goods where there was no indication that sub-standard goods were intentionally ordered. The discussion therefore supports confiscation while recognising that the request for re-export and replacement may be examined under the Handbook and disposed of according to law. On cassia, absolute confiscation was considered unwarranted because similar goods had been allowed redemption in comparable matters and no special reason justified a harsher course. The appropriate course was to permit redemption on payment of a suitable fine.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Oct 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Jul 2011 17:54:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121082" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (10) TMI 183 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83938</link>
      <description>Imported cloves found unfit for human consumption were treated as confiscable, but the import policy allowed consideration of re-export and replacement of defective goods where there was no indication that sub-standard goods were intentionally ordered. The discussion therefore supports confiscation while recognising that the request for re-export and replacement may be examined under the Handbook and disposed of according to law. On cassia, absolute confiscation was considered unwarranted because similar goods had been allowed redemption in comparable matters and no special reason justified a harsher course. The appropriate course was to permit redemption on payment of a suitable fine.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Oct 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83938</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>