<?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 (3) TMI 594 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119122</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the lower authorities&#039; orders of confiscation and penalty imposition under the Customs Act, 1962. The appellants successfully argued that the gold was validly imported under a genuine duty receipt and proper customs channels, despite allegations of an invalid passport. The Tribunal found the Department failed to prove illegal importation, emphasizing the appellants&#039; compliance with necessary documentation. As a result, the seized gold bars were ordered to be released to the appellant company, with instructions for payment if the gold had been sold by the Department.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Jul 2012 11:46:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156119" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (3) TMI 594 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119122</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the lower authorities&#039; orders of confiscation and penalty imposition under the Customs Act, 1962. The appellants successfully argued that the gold was validly imported under a genuine duty receipt and proper customs channels, despite allegations of an invalid passport. The Tribunal found the Department failed to prove illegal importation, emphasizing the appellants&#039; compliance with necessary documentation. As a result, the seized gold bars were ordered to be released to the appellant company, with instructions for payment if the gold had been sold by the Department.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119122</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>