<?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 (9) TMI 366 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94091</link>
    <description>The tribunal partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty under Section 114A due to the absence of mala fide intention in the misdeclaration. While upholding the confiscation of goods, they reduced the redemption fine from Rs. 5 lakhs to Rs. 1 lakh, considering the circumstances of the case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Nov 2011 10:51:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=131151" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (9) TMI 366 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94091</link>
      <description>The tribunal partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty under Section 114A due to the absence of mala fide intention in the misdeclaration. While upholding the confiscation of goods, they reduced the redemption fine from Rs. 5 lakhs to Rs. 1 lakh, considering the circumstances of the case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94091</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>