<?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>2013 (8) TMI 655 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236363</link>
    <description>Goods concealed as basmati rice but found to contain non-basmati rice were treated as a fraudulent attempt to export goods contrary to the applicable export policy and DGFT notification. On that record, confiscation was justified, and the redemption fine and penalty were upheld as proportionate to the misconduct. As the redemption fine had already been reduced in appeal, no further interference was warranted with the punitive or confiscatory measures, and the challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Aug 2013 07:56:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=198770" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (8) TMI 655 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236363</link>
      <description>Goods concealed as basmati rice but found to contain non-basmati rice were treated as a fraudulent attempt to export goods contrary to the applicable export policy and DGFT notification. On that record, confiscation was justified, and the redemption fine and penalty were upheld as proportionate to the misconduct. As the redemption fine had already been reduced in appeal, no further interference was warranted with the punitive or confiscatory measures, and the challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236363</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>