<?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 490 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120692</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner of Customs&#039; decision to hold the goods liable for confiscation and impose penalties on the appellants. The Tribunal held that once the duty demand was dropped, confiscation and penalties could not be imposed, citing relevant case law that penal provisions cannot be invoked if the duty demand is not sustained. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that there was no basis for confiscation or penalties in this case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:54:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=157687" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (11) TMI 490 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120692</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner of Customs&#039; decision to hold the goods liable for confiscation and impose penalties on the appellants. The Tribunal held that once the duty demand was dropped, confiscation and penalties could not be imposed, citing relevant case law that penal provisions cannot be invoked if the duty demand is not sustained. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that there was no basis for confiscation or penalties in this case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120692</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>