<?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 458 - CESTAT,  MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110182</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeals by A.R. Gupta, Pravin Gupta, and Bipin Gupta, upholding the penalties imposed on them. The appeal by Vinod Jatia was successful, resulting in the penalty imposed on him being set aside. J.K. Yagnik&#039;s appeal was partially allowed, reducing his penalty to Rs. 1 lakh. H.P. Daga &amp;amp; Co.&#039;s appeal was allowed for a fresh adjudication due to lack of proper notice and hearing, ensuring a fair opportunity for presenting their case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 Apr 2012 11:18:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=147198" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (10) TMI 458 - CESTAT,  MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110182</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeals by A.R. Gupta, Pravin Gupta, and Bipin Gupta, upholding the penalties imposed on them. The appeal by Vinod Jatia was successful, resulting in the penalty imposed on him being set aside. J.K. Yagnik&#039;s appeal was partially allowed, reducing his penalty to Rs. 1 lakh. H.P. Daga &amp;amp; Co.&#039;s appeal was allowed for a fresh adjudication due to lack of proper notice and hearing, ensuring a fair opportunity for presenting their case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110182</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>