<?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 (11) TMI 494 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101615</link>
    <description>Customs duty, confiscation, and penalty under an exemption scheme cannot be fastened on a licence holder unless the notice and evidence establish that it was the actual importer or otherwise legally chargeable. On the facts, the supporting manufacturers imported the goods and filed the bills of entry, so liability could not be shifted to the licence holder; its liability was set aside. By contrast, the supporting manufacturers&#039; sale of the imported goods in the open market and availment of Modvat credit breached the exemption and import policy conditions, and later reversal of credit did not cure the violation; their penalty was upheld, subject to reduction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 13:42:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138664" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (11) TMI 494 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101615</link>
      <description>Customs duty, confiscation, and penalty under an exemption scheme cannot be fastened on a licence holder unless the notice and evidence establish that it was the actual importer or otherwise legally chargeable. On the facts, the supporting manufacturers imported the goods and filed the bills of entry, so liability could not be shifted to the licence holder; its liability was set aside. By contrast, the supporting manufacturers&#039; sale of the imported goods in the open market and availment of Modvat credit breached the exemption and import policy conditions, and later reversal of credit did not cure the violation; their penalty was upheld, subject to reduction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101615</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>