<?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 (6) TMI 331 - CESTAT,  MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115476</link>
    <description>Customs duty remains leviable on imported goods even if the applicants disown ownership, because liability attaches to goods that have in fact been imported into India. The Tribunal found no error apparent on the record in the duty demand, noting that the impugned order did not require the applicants to pay duty in a situation where they did not redeem the goods. On that basis, the rectification plea failed and the confirmed duty demand was left undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 May 2012 18:30:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152475" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (6) TMI 331 - CESTAT,  MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115476</link>
      <description>Customs duty remains leviable on imported goods even if the applicants disown ownership, because liability attaches to goods that have in fact been imported into India. The Tribunal found no error apparent on the record in the duty demand, noting that the impugned order did not require the applicants to pay duty in a situation where they did not redeem the goods. On that basis, the rectification plea failed and the confirmed duty demand was left undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115476</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>