<?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>2004 (5) TMI 427 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112294</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962, and allowed the appeal regarding the clearance of staple pins under a REP license. The decision was based on findings that the appellants used the staple pins as stationery items, not as embellishments as required by the clarification. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of past practices in similar cases, questioned the validity of the penalty based on the clarification, and highlighted the lack of findings regarding lack of bona fides.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2012 15:13:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=149310" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (5) TMI 427 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112294</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962, and allowed the appeal regarding the clearance of staple pins under a REP license. The decision was based on findings that the appellants used the staple pins as stationery items, not as embellishments as required by the clarification. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of past practices in similar cases, questioned the validity of the penalty based on the clarification, and highlighted the lack of findings regarding lack of bona fides.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112294</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>