<?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>1999 (12) TMI 188 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93070</link>
    <description>The tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the impugned orders and reducing the penalties imposed on the appellants. The judgment emphasized that without specific provisions in the law for punishing attempts or preparations for violations, the appellants could not be held liable under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2011 11:30:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=130131" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (12) TMI 188 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93070</link>
      <description>The tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the impugned orders and reducing the penalties imposed on the appellants. The judgment emphasized that without specific provisions in the law for punishing attempts or preparations for violations, the appellants could not be held liable under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93070</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>