<?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>2002 (9) TMI 740 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108275</link>
    <description>Second-hand machinery shown by a Chartered Engineer&#039;s certificate to be more than 10 years old was treated as a restricted import requiring a specific licence under the applicable import policy. Because the importer did not rebut the age finding, did not respond to the show cause notice, and produced no contrary evidence from the supplier or manufacturer, confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act read with Section 3(3) of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 was sustained. Redemption fine and penalty were also regarded as reasonable in light of the goods&#039; value and the lack of a persuasive challenge to valuation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2012 17:19:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=145292" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (9) TMI 740 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108275</link>
      <description>Second-hand machinery shown by a Chartered Engineer&#039;s certificate to be more than 10 years old was treated as a restricted import requiring a specific licence under the applicable import policy. Because the importer did not rebut the age finding, did not respond to the show cause notice, and produced no contrary evidence from the supplier or manufacturer, confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act read with Section 3(3) of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 was sustained. Redemption fine and penalty were also regarded as reasonable in light of the goods&#039; value and the lack of a persuasive challenge to valuation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108275</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>