<?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 (11) TMI 429 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120358</link>
    <description>Duty-free import of capital goods by a 100% export-oriented unit was denied where the imported generator set was used mainly to produce electricity for sale in the Domestic Tariff Area, not for captive manufacture of export goods. On those facts, the customs exemption conditions were not satisfied, and the duty demands were sustained. Confiscation of the imported capital goods was also upheld because the import breached the notification requirements. The tribunal, however, treated the development authority&#039;s knowledge and consent as mitigating factors, so the redemption fine was reduced and some penalties were set aside or reduced, including the separate penalty on the executive director.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:02:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=157353" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (11) TMI 429 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120358</link>
      <description>Duty-free import of capital goods by a 100% export-oriented unit was denied where the imported generator set was used mainly to produce electricity for sale in the Domestic Tariff Area, not for captive manufacture of export goods. On those facts, the customs exemption conditions were not satisfied, and the duty demands were sustained. Confiscation of the imported capital goods was also upheld because the import breached the notification requirements. The tribunal, however, treated the development authority&#039;s knowledge and consent as mitigating factors, so the redemption fine was reduced and some penalties were set aside or reduced, including the separate penalty on the executive director.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120358</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>