<?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 (11) TMI 481 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94805</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed with consequential relief as the Tribunal found in favor of the appellant regarding the confiscation of the barge under Section 111(j) of the Customs Act, 1962, and the penalty imposed under Section 112(a). The classification of the barge as a vessel and compliance with filing requirements for the Bill of Entry were pivotal in the decision, with the Tribunal emphasizing the correct interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Customs Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Dec 2011 18:41:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=131864" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (11) TMI 481 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94805</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed with consequential relief as the Tribunal found in favor of the appellant regarding the confiscation of the barge under Section 111(j) of the Customs Act, 1962, and the penalty imposed under Section 112(a). The classification of the barge as a vessel and compliance with filing requirements for the Bill of Entry were pivotal in the decision, with the Tribunal emphasizing the correct interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Customs Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94805</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>