<?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 (4) TMI 433 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112992</link>
    <description>Goods imported temporarily for demonstration purposes were considered eligible for re-export where the importer could not clear or use them for the intended purpose because the necessary documents were unavailable. On those facts, the request for re-export was treated as justified, and redemption fine and penalty were found unwarranted. The consignment was therefore permitted to be re-exported, and the fine and penalty were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 11:58:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150008" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (4) TMI 433 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112992</link>
      <description>Goods imported temporarily for demonstration purposes were considered eligible for re-export where the importer could not clear or use them for the intended purpose because the necessary documents were unavailable. On those facts, the request for re-export was treated as justified, and redemption fine and penalty were found unwarranted. The consignment was therefore permitted to be re-exported, and the fine and penalty were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112992</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>