<?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>2006 (1) TMI 499 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119018</link>
    <description>Acceptance of an enhanced customs value and an importer&#039;s admission under Section 108 can justify redemption fine and penalty for misdeclaration of value. Where the goods are not smuggled and the lapse is confined to under-declaration for duty purposes, the sanction must remain proportionate to the nature of the breach and surrounding circumstances. On that approach, liability in principle was sustained, but the redemption fine and penalty were reduced because the original amounts were considered excessive.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Jul 2012 14:35:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156015" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (1) TMI 499 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119018</link>
      <description>Acceptance of an enhanced customs value and an importer&#039;s admission under Section 108 can justify redemption fine and penalty for misdeclaration of value. Where the goods are not smuggled and the lapse is confined to under-declaration for duty purposes, the sanction must remain proportionate to the nature of the breach and surrounding circumstances. On that approach, liability in principle was sustained, but the redemption fine and penalty were reduced because the original amounts were considered excessive.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119018</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>