<?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 (6) TMI 539 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98289</link>
    <description>Where goods are neither prohibited nor notified, absolute confiscation is not sustainable and redemption under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 must be afforded; confiscation under Section 111(d) cannot stand as absolute confiscation. Applying that consistent Tribunal view to a stay petition involving cellular phones said to be non-prohibited goods, unconditional waiver of pre-deposit of the penalty amount was granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 18:50:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=135346" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (6) TMI 539 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98289</link>
      <description>Where goods are neither prohibited nor notified, absolute confiscation is not sustainable and redemption under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 must be afforded; confiscation under Section 111(d) cannot stand as absolute confiscation. Applying that consistent Tribunal view to a stay petition involving cellular phones said to be non-prohibited goods, unconditional waiver of pre-deposit of the penalty amount was granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98289</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>