<?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 (5) TMI 692 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126223</link>
    <description>The appellate tribunal set aside the impugned Order-in-Original imposing redemption fine and penalty in a theft case. The tribunal found that the appellant was unaware of the illegal activities conducted by the drivers and lacked knowledge of the nature of the goods being transported. As the adjudicating authority failed to establish a contravention of the law by the appellant, the appeal was allowed, and the judgment was pronounced on 29-5-2009.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Nov 2012 14:30:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=163120" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (5) TMI 692 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126223</link>
      <description>The appellate tribunal set aside the impugned Order-in-Original imposing redemption fine and penalty in a theft case. The tribunal found that the appellant was unaware of the illegal activities conducted by the drivers and lacked knowledge of the nature of the goods being transported. As the adjudicating authority failed to establish a contravention of the law by the appellant, the appeal was allowed, and the judgment was pronounced on 29-5-2009.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126223</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>