<?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>1998 (2) TMI 189 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88148</link>
    <description>The case involved concealment of worked emeralds in an imported consignment of unworked emeralds, leading to misdeclaration and unauthorized import. The goods were confiscated under relevant sections of the Customs Act, 1962, with the option of paying a fine in lieu of confiscation and re-shipment. The Appellants contested the redemption fine and personal penalty, arguing lack of involvement in the discrepancies. The jurisdiction of levying a redemption fine for re-export was debated, citing previous Tribunal decisions. Ultimately, the Commissioner&#039;s order was upheld with modifications, reducing the penalties based on the Appellants&#039; level of involvement in the violations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2011 14:19:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=125214" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (2) TMI 189 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88148</link>
      <description>The case involved concealment of worked emeralds in an imported consignment of unworked emeralds, leading to misdeclaration and unauthorized import. The goods were confiscated under relevant sections of the Customs Act, 1962, with the option of paying a fine in lieu of confiscation and re-shipment. The Appellants contested the redemption fine and personal penalty, arguing lack of involvement in the discrepancies. The jurisdiction of levying a redemption fine for re-export was debated, citing previous Tribunal decisions. Ultimately, the Commissioner&#039;s order was upheld with modifications, reducing the penalties based on the Appellants&#039; level of involvement in the violations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88148</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>