<?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 689 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236397</link>
    <description>Warehoused capital goods may be re-exported under the Customs Act when the prescribed conditions are met, and an extension of the warehousing period granted to facilitate that re-export is valid. On the facts, the department did not prove any breach of warehousing or export conditions, so duty demand and confiscation were not sustainable. Penalties under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 and Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 also failed because no contravention or culpable intent was established. The ratio is that re-export of warehoused goods, when permitted in accordance with statute, does not justify confiscation or penal consequences absent violation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 15:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=198804" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (8) TMI 689 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236397</link>
      <description>Warehoused capital goods may be re-exported under the Customs Act when the prescribed conditions are met, and an extension of the warehousing period granted to facilitate that re-export is valid. On the facts, the department did not prove any breach of warehousing or export conditions, so duty demand and confiscation were not sustainable. Penalties under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 and Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 also failed because no contravention or culpable intent was established. The ratio is that re-export of warehoused goods, when permitted in accordance with statute, does not justify confiscation or penal consequences absent violation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236397</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>