<?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>2003 (10) TMI 325 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108034</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed under Section 117 of the Customs Act on appellants for failure to extend the warehousing period for goods. The Tribunal held that since the request for extension was pending before the Chief Commissioner, penal action was not warranted. The decision emphasizes procedural fairness and the authority of the Chief Commissioner in extending warehousing periods, highlighting that penalties should not be imposed arbitrarily when requests are pending before competent authorities.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 14:29:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=145051" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (10) TMI 325 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108034</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed under Section 117 of the Customs Act on appellants for failure to extend the warehousing period for goods. The Tribunal held that since the request for extension was pending before the Chief Commissioner, penal action was not warranted. The decision emphasizes procedural fairness and the authority of the Chief Commissioner in extending warehousing periods, highlighting that penalties should not be imposed arbitrarily when requests are pending before competent authorities.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108034</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>