<?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>2006 (12) TMI 45 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1329</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the duty demand and confiscation of goods under Section 111(o) of the Customs Act due to the diversion of imported raw materials instead of using them for export obligation discharge. The penalty imposed by the Commissioner was reduced from Rs. 55 lakhs to Rs. 10 lakhs, deeming the original amount excessive. The appeal was disposed of with modifications to reflect the reduced penalty amount.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 16:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40740" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (12) TMI 45 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1329</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the duty demand and confiscation of goods under Section 111(o) of the Customs Act due to the diversion of imported raw materials instead of using them for export obligation discharge. The penalty imposed by the Commissioner was reduced from Rs. 55 lakhs to Rs. 10 lakhs, deeming the original amount excessive. The appeal was disposed of with modifications to reflect the reduced penalty amount.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1329</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>