<?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 (12) TMI 478 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108379</link>
    <description>Imported speakers shipped before the policy amendment were allowed to be cleared without confiscation or fine because the importer had acted under the earlier practice, and similar consignments had already been cleared by customs in the same manner. The Commissioner&#039;s grant of leniency was treated as a reasonable exercise of discretion on those facts, and no interference was warranted. The departmental challenge therefore failed, and the lenient clearance was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Mar 2012 12:56:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=145396" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (12) TMI 478 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108379</link>
      <description>Imported speakers shipped before the policy amendment were allowed to be cleared without confiscation or fine because the importer had acted under the earlier practice, and similar consignments had already been cleared by customs in the same manner. The Commissioner&#039;s grant of leniency was treated as a reasonable exercise of discretion on those facts, and no interference was warranted. The departmental challenge therefore failed, and the lenient clearance was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108379</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>