<?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>2009 (2) TMI 566 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125851</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s ROM application, finding no error in its order regarding redemption fine imposition as the Supreme Court judgment was not cited during the appeal. The Tribunal emphasized the distinct facts of the case where goods were not released on bond, making the Supreme Court ruling irrelevant. Additionally, the Commissioner&#039;s timing of accepting the order before filing the ROM application was questioned, leading to the dismissal of the application.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Oct 2012 17:51:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=162758" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (2) TMI 566 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125851</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s ROM application, finding no error in its order regarding redemption fine imposition as the Supreme Court judgment was not cited during the appeal. The Tribunal emphasized the distinct facts of the case where goods were not released on bond, making the Supreme Court ruling irrelevant. Additionally, the Commissioner&#039;s timing of accepting the order before filing the ROM application was questioned, leading to the dismissal of the application.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125851</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>