<?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>2001 (2) TMI 492 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95959</link>
    <description>The Tribunal denied the appellant&#039;s application for a full waiver of the penalty amount of Rs. 5 lakhs imposed by the Commissioner of Customs (EP), Mumbai. Instead, the Tribunal directed a partial deposit of Rs. 1 lakh within a specified time frame, with the possibility of waiving the remaining penalty upon compliance. Failure to comply would result in the dismissal of the appeal without further notice, setting a compliance reporting date for a future hearing. The Tribunal found that the appellant had not sufficiently established a strong prima facie case for a complete waiver based on the discrepancies in the consignment contents and the Commissioner&#039;s cautious acceptance of the appellant&#039;s claim of being misled.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2011 12:41:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=133018" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (2) TMI 492 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95959</link>
      <description>The Tribunal denied the appellant&#039;s application for a full waiver of the penalty amount of Rs. 5 lakhs imposed by the Commissioner of Customs (EP), Mumbai. Instead, the Tribunal directed a partial deposit of Rs. 1 lakh within a specified time frame, with the possibility of waiving the remaining penalty upon compliance. Failure to comply would result in the dismissal of the appeal without further notice, setting a compliance reporting date for a future hearing. The Tribunal found that the appellant had not sufficiently established a strong prima facie case for a complete waiver based on the discrepancies in the consignment contents and the Commissioner&#039;s cautious acceptance of the appellant&#039;s claim of being misled.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95959</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>