<?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 (1) TMI 259 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90624</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld the Collector of Customs, Bombay&#039;s decision to confiscate three Injection Moulding Machines valued at Rs. 20,76,363 under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962, and impose a redemption fine and penalty of Rs. 1 lakh under Sections 111(d) and 112, respectively. Despite the appellants&#039; argument of a supplier-induced model substitution due to production changes, discrepancies between licensed and actual imported models led to the rejection of the appeal. The tribunal emphasized the importance of accurate documentation and compliance with import license specifications, resulting in the dismissal of the appellants&#039; challenge.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2011 13:20:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=127686" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (1) TMI 259 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90624</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld the Collector of Customs, Bombay&#039;s decision to confiscate three Injection Moulding Machines valued at Rs. 20,76,363 under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962, and impose a redemption fine and penalty of Rs. 1 lakh under Sections 111(d) and 112, respectively. Despite the appellants&#039; argument of a supplier-induced model substitution due to production changes, discrepancies between licensed and actual imported models led to the rejection of the appeal. The tribunal emphasized the importance of accurate documentation and compliance with import license specifications, resulting in the dismissal of the appellants&#039; challenge.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90624</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>