<?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>2010 (8) TMI 339 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202865</link>
    <description>In provisional release of seized export goods, the customs circular required release on execution of a bond equivalent to the value of the goods and probable fine and penalty, and did not prescribe a bank guarantee. Since the dispute concerned only provisional release and no duty demand or penalty adjudication had been made, insisting on a bank guarantee was unjustified. The bank guarantee condition was set aside and release was directed on bond alone.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Feb 2011 17:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=176437" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (8) TMI 339 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202865</link>
      <description>In provisional release of seized export goods, the customs circular required release on execution of a bond equivalent to the value of the goods and probable fine and penalty, and did not prescribe a bank guarantee. Since the dispute concerned only provisional release and no duty demand or penalty adjudication had been made, insisting on a bank guarantee was unjustified. The bank guarantee condition was set aside and release was directed on bond alone.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202865</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>