<?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 (10) TMI 163 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89612</link>
    <description>The appeals were allowed, and the case was remanded for a fresh adjudication. The Tribunal found that the premature confiscation of goods before physical import into India rendered the orders void ab initio. It was emphasized that goods must become imported goods as defined by the Customs Act before confiscation can be ordered. The timing of adjudication in relation to the import process was deemed crucial, requiring a de novo adjudication to address fine adequacy and penalty imposition based on additional evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 17 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Sep 2011 14:43:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126674" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (10) TMI 163 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89612</link>
      <description>The appeals were allowed, and the case was remanded for a fresh adjudication. The Tribunal found that the premature confiscation of goods before physical import into India rendered the orders void ab initio. It was emphasized that goods must become imported goods as defined by the Customs Act before confiscation can be ordered. The timing of adjudication in relation to the import process was deemed crucial, requiring a de novo adjudication to address fine adequacy and penalty imposition based on additional evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 17 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89612</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>