<?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 296 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92014</link>
    <description>Confiscation of seized hides, skins and the truck was held unsustainable because the evidence did not establish a clear attempt to export the goods to Bangladesh. The Tribunal relied on the surrounding facts, including the accident of the original truck, challans for loading, the route of the replacement truck, the interception point, and the statements of the driver and khalasi, and found that customs had not effectively rebutted the appellants&#039; explanation. As the alleged attempt to export was not proved on the material before it, the redemption fine and personal penalties also could not stand. The appeals succeeded and the impugned adjudication was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Oct 2011 15:31:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129075" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (1) TMI 296 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92014</link>
      <description>Confiscation of seized hides, skins and the truck was held unsustainable because the evidence did not establish a clear attempt to export the goods to Bangladesh. The Tribunal relied on the surrounding facts, including the accident of the original truck, challans for loading, the route of the replacement truck, the interception point, and the statements of the driver and khalasi, and found that customs had not effectively rebutted the appellants&#039; explanation. As the alleged attempt to export was not proved on the material before it, the redemption fine and personal penalties also could not stand. The appeals succeeded and the impugned adjudication was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92014</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>