<?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 (7) TMI 463 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112377</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal found no evidence of misdeclaration by the appellant, who was assisting in the import process without making declarations on the Bill of Entry. As the appellant did not misdeclare values, the penalty was deemed unwarranted, and the order imposing the penalty was overturned, allowing the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2012 18:16:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=149393" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (7) TMI 463 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112377</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal found no evidence of misdeclaration by the appellant, who was assisting in the import process without making declarations on the Bill of Entry. As the appellant did not misdeclare values, the penalty was deemed unwarranted, and the order imposing the penalty was overturned, allowing the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112377</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>