<?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>2007 (2) TMI 82 - CESTAT,NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1625</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the imposition of redemption fine and penalty on re-exported goods, distinguishing between penalty for improper importation and confiscation of goods. The appellant&#039;s argument that the goods were not liable for redemption fine and penalty was dismissed, citing settled Supreme Court precedent. The appeal was rejected, and the appellant&#039;s plea for a reduction in the fine and penalty amount was denied due to the importation of goods subject to anti-dumping duty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2008 07:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=41023" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (2) TMI 82 - CESTAT,NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1625</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the imposition of redemption fine and penalty on re-exported goods, distinguishing between penalty for improper importation and confiscation of goods. The appellant&#039;s argument that the goods were not liable for redemption fine and penalty was dismissed, citing settled Supreme Court precedent. The appeal was rejected, and the appellant&#039;s plea for a reduction in the fine and penalty amount was denied due to the importation of goods subject to anti-dumping duty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1625</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>