<?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>2005 (4) TMI 365 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115334</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld the lower appellate authority&#039;s decision to confiscate the truck and impose a penalty due to its involvement in carrying contraband goods worth Rs. 5,42,250/-, despite the appellant&#039;s argument of lack of proven charges. The tribunal considered the circumstances and reduced the redemption fine to Rs. 50,000/- and the penalty to Rs. 20,000/- due to the truck&#039;s prolonged custody affecting its value. The appellant&#039;s claim of ignorance regarding the contraband goods was dismissed as he failed to prove lack of knowledge or identify the owner, leading to the affirmation of the penalty and confiscation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 May 2012 12:09:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152333" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (4) TMI 365 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115334</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld the lower appellate authority&#039;s decision to confiscate the truck and impose a penalty due to its involvement in carrying contraband goods worth Rs. 5,42,250/-, despite the appellant&#039;s argument of lack of proven charges. The tribunal considered the circumstances and reduced the redemption fine to Rs. 50,000/- and the penalty to Rs. 20,000/- due to the truck&#039;s prolonged custody affecting its value. The appellant&#039;s claim of ignorance regarding the contraband goods was dismissed as he failed to prove lack of knowledge or identify the owner, leading to the affirmation of the penalty and confiscation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115334</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>