<?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 (7) TMI 925 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261964</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 was not imposable on the appellant as they had not filed any Bill of Entry, had not placed any order for the goods, and were not involved in any act rendering the goods liable for confiscation. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal with consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2016 12:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=391498" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (7) TMI 925 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261964</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 was not imposable on the appellant as they had not filed any Bill of Entry, had not placed any order for the goods, and were not involved in any act rendering the goods liable for confiscation. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal with consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261964</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>