<?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>2000 (1) TMI 256 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93269</link>
    <description>The tribunal found that the imported goods did not qualify for duty-free clearance as lining material, despite the importers&#039; arguments supported by a test report. A deposit of Rs. 1 lakh was required from the importers. The tribunal also determined that the Custom House Agent was not involved in the duty evasion and waived the penalty imposed on them. Compliance deadlines were set for the parties involved.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2011 15:35:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=130330" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (1) TMI 256 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93269</link>
      <description>The tribunal found that the imported goods did not qualify for duty-free clearance as lining material, despite the importers&#039; arguments supported by a test report. A deposit of Rs. 1 lakh was required from the importers. The tribunal also determined that the Custom House Agent was not involved in the duty evasion and waived the penalty imposed on them. Compliance deadlines were set for the parties involved.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93269</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>