<?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>1993 (7) TMI 211 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90329</link>
    <description>For reference purposes, a question is referable where the statutory provision admits more than one plausible interpretation; it is not necessary to decide the merits conclusively. On that basis, the text treats as referable the issue whether redemption under Section 125 of the Customs Act can be extended to a carrier who is not the owner, and the issue whether a penalty order is vitiated when it does not specify the precise sub-clause of Section 112, where the factual basis and legal ground are otherwise clear. Matters depending on appreciation of evidence, including baggage concession, smuggling attempt, and the character of the goods, were treated as factual and not referable. In the absence of a stay order, implementation of the earlier order was to proceed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jul 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Oct 2011 16:56:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=127391" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (7) TMI 211 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90329</link>
      <description>For reference purposes, a question is referable where the statutory provision admits more than one plausible interpretation; it is not necessary to decide the merits conclusively. On that basis, the text treats as referable the issue whether redemption under Section 125 of the Customs Act can be extended to a carrier who is not the owner, and the issue whether a penalty order is vitiated when it does not specify the precise sub-clause of Section 112, where the factual basis and legal ground are otherwise clear. Matters depending on appreciation of evidence, including baggage concession, smuggling attempt, and the character of the goods, were treated as factual and not referable. In the absence of a stay order, implementation of the earlier order was to proceed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jul 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90329</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>