<?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 (9) TMI 27 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236594</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court dismissed the Department&#039;s appeals challenging redemption fines and penalties imposed on imported second-hand goods. The judgment emphasized the case-specific nature of redemption fines, highlighting the discretion of the adjudicating authority in determining them. The Department failed to provide sufficient justification for contesting the fines and penalties, as they were not considered arbitrary. The Commissioner (Appeals) had reduced fines based on discretion, considering the Chartered Engineer&#039;s assessment rather than market data. Consequently, all Department appeals were rejected, affirming the decisions on redemption fines and penalties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2013 12:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=199001" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (9) TMI 27 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236594</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court dismissed the Department&#039;s appeals challenging redemption fines and penalties imposed on imported second-hand goods. The judgment emphasized the case-specific nature of redemption fines, highlighting the discretion of the adjudicating authority in determining them. The Department failed to provide sufficient justification for contesting the fines and penalties, as they were not considered arbitrary. The Commissioner (Appeals) had reduced fines based on discretion, considering the Chartered Engineer&#039;s assessment rather than market data. Consequently, all Department appeals were rejected, affirming the decisions on redemption fines and penalties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236594</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>