<?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 513 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114459</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court reversed the High Court&#039;s decision and directed the continuation of proceedings under the Customs Act, 1962, for less charge demands and notice issuance. The Commissioner confirmed the demand, confiscated goods, imposed penalties, and allowed redemption on payment of a fine. The Tribunal granted partial pre-deposit of penalties based on financial hardship, with the balance waived pending appeal. The Tribunal found no prima facie evidence of involvement in circumventing import restrictions for two applicants, waiving their penalties. Compliance with the Supreme Court&#039;s directions was emphasized throughout the adjudication process.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 17:52:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151458" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (5) TMI 513 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114459</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court reversed the High Court&#039;s decision and directed the continuation of proceedings under the Customs Act, 1962, for less charge demands and notice issuance. The Commissioner confirmed the demand, confiscated goods, imposed penalties, and allowed redemption on payment of a fine. The Tribunal granted partial pre-deposit of penalties based on financial hardship, with the balance waived pending appeal. The Tribunal found no prima facie evidence of involvement in circumventing import restrictions for two applicants, waiving their penalties. Compliance with the Supreme Court&#039;s directions was emphasized throughout the adjudication process.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114459</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>