<?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 507 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95554</link>
    <description>Plastic cable ties imported as bundle-securement articles were treated as not answering the description of couplings, so they fell under the restricted import classification for other plastic articles and required a specific import licence. In the absence of that licence, confiscation for violation of import control was justified. The dispute was found to be bona fide and without mala fide intent, so the personal penalty was set aside and the redemption fine was reduced.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:23:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=132613" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (12) TMI 507 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95554</link>
      <description>Plastic cable ties imported as bundle-securement articles were treated as not answering the description of couplings, so they fell under the restricted import classification for other plastic articles and required a specific import licence. In the absence of that licence, confiscation for violation of import control was justified. The dispute was found to be bona fide and without mala fide intent, so the personal penalty was set aside and the redemption fine was reduced.</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=95554</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>