<?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>2015 (3) TMI 991 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258057</link>
    <description>The tribunal held that the imported non-laminated boards are subject to anti-dumping duty under Notification No. 116/2009-Cus, despite ink printing. The tribunal emphasized interpreting the notification plainly without adding extraneous meanings. While acknowledging potential interpretation issues, the tribunal found no deliberate duty avoidance intention. Consequently, confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty were set aside, partially allowing the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Aug 2015 12:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=379954" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (3) TMI 991 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258057</link>
      <description>The tribunal held that the imported non-laminated boards are subject to anti-dumping duty under Notification No. 116/2009-Cus, despite ink printing. The tribunal emphasized interpreting the notification plainly without adding extraneous meanings. While acknowledging potential interpretation issues, the tribunal found no deliberate duty avoidance intention. Consequently, confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty were set aside, partially allowing the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258057</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>