<?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>1998 (9) TMI 564 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105083</link>
    <description>Misdeclaration under the Customs Act may support confiscation where importers accept a classification showing goods as plastic articles rather than declared brass fittings. Goods imported under an advance licence were treated as plastic articles after their classification changed from a metal heading to a plastic heading, defeating the contention that they were metallic fittings mounted on synthetic material. Confiscation remained sustainable, while redemption fine was completely remitted because the residual fine was excessive after prior relief. The penalty was maintained. Acceptance of the relevant classification prevents a challenge to confiscation for misdeclaration, although fine may be reduced on the facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Mar 2012 14:17:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=142122" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (9) TMI 564 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105083</link>
      <description>Misdeclaration under the Customs Act may support confiscation where importers accept a classification showing goods as plastic articles rather than declared brass fittings. Goods imported under an advance licence were treated as plastic articles after their classification changed from a metal heading to a plastic heading, defeating the contention that they were metallic fittings mounted on synthetic material. Confiscation remained sustainable, while redemption fine was completely remitted because the residual fine was excessive after prior relief. The penalty was maintained. Acceptance of the relevant classification prevents a challenge to confiscation for misdeclaration, although fine may be reduced on the facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105083</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>