<?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 (7) TMI 476 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119824</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found discrepancies in the valuation process and the determination of liability for confiscation under the Customs Act. The case required fresh reconsideration in de novo proceedings, particularly concerning penalty under Section 114A and the redetermination of goods liable for confiscation. The appeals were allowed for remand to address these critical aspects comprehensively.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Jul 2012 13:29:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156820" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (7) TMI 476 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119824</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found discrepancies in the valuation process and the determination of liability for confiscation under the Customs Act. The case required fresh reconsideration in de novo proceedings, particularly concerning penalty under Section 114A and the redetermination of goods liable for confiscation. The appeals were allowed for remand to address these critical aspects comprehensively.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119824</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>