<?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>2007 (3) TMI 489 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121254</link>
    <description>The appellant was directed to deposit Rs. 1,00,000/- within four weeks for the penalty imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act related to fraudulent import of MS scrap, distinguishing his lesser involvement compared to other parties in the scheme. The Tribunal acknowledged his participation in the conspiracy but found no evidence of a leading role, resulting in a reduced deposit amount compared to other involved parties. Compliance was required by April 26, 2007.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2012 17:43:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=158248" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (3) TMI 489 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121254</link>
      <description>The appellant was directed to deposit Rs. 1,00,000/- within four weeks for the penalty imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act related to fraudulent import of MS scrap, distinguishing his lesser involvement compared to other parties in the scheme. The Tribunal acknowledged his participation in the conspiracy but found no evidence of a leading role, resulting in a reduced deposit amount compared to other involved parties. Compliance was required by April 26, 2007.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121254</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>