https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209249 The Tribunal upheld the demand of duty in both the Mumbai and Chennai cases but set aside the demand for interest under Section 28AB of the Customs Act. Penalties were adjusted, with penalties on 'M/s Global Art' and Mr. Bimal Kumar Mehra being reduced or set aside based on entity representation. Confiscation of goods was upheld, but redemption fine was set aside due to non-availability of goods. The applicability of Sections 114A and 28AB was clarified, with penalties and interest under these sections being set aside for imports made before the relevant dates. en-us Tue, 22 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Jul 2013 10:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209249 The Tribunal upheld the demand of duty in both the Mumbai and Chennai cases but set aside the demand for interest under Section 28AB of the Customs Act. Penalties were adjusted, with penalties on 'M/s Global Art' and Mr. Bimal Kumar Mehra being reduced or set aside based on entity representation. Confiscation of goods was upheld, but redemption fine was set aside due to non-availability of goods. The applicability of Sections 114A and 28AB was clarified, with penalties and interest under these sections being set aside for imports made before the relevant dates. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 22 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209249