<?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 (2) TMI 558 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112890</link>
    <description>The appeals filed by M/s. Tiger Umbrella Industries and its partners were rejected, upholding confiscation and fines but setting aside penalties. The allegations of double jeopardy were dismissed as penalties related to different actions. Previous tribunal decisions and Ministry of Commerce orders were deemed inapplicable. Penalties were reduced for M/s. Texto Plast Industries and partners, with one partner&#039;s penalty set aside due to lack of evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 13:44:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=149906" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (2) TMI 558 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112890</link>
      <description>The appeals filed by M/s. Tiger Umbrella Industries and its partners were rejected, upholding confiscation and fines but setting aside penalties. The allegations of double jeopardy were dismissed as penalties related to different actions. Previous tribunal decisions and Ministry of Commerce orders were deemed inapplicable. Penalties were reduced for M/s. Texto Plast Industries and partners, with one partner&#039;s penalty set aside due to lack of evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112890</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>