<?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 (7) TMI 477 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97190</link>
    <description>Penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act was found inapplicable where the goods had been lawfully imported and any illegality arose only from their subsequent sale or disposal contrary to law. On that reasoning, mere concern with disposal after import did not attract clause (a), and the penalty order was treated as containing an error apparent on the record. The penalty was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 Jan 2012 12:58:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134248" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (7) TMI 477 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97190</link>
      <description>Penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act was found inapplicable where the goods had been lawfully imported and any illegality arose only from their subsequent sale or disposal contrary to law. On that reasoning, mere concern with disposal after import did not attract clause (a), and the penalty order was treated as containing an error apparent on the record. The penalty was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97190</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>