<?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>2016 (2) TMI 101 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271396</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the confiscation of the machinery and melting scrap but reduced the penalty from &amp;amp;8377; 3 lakhs to &amp;amp;8377; 50,000. The appellant&#039;s status as an actual user and lack of malafide intent were considered, leading to the reduction in penalty. The appeal was partly allowed, maintaining the impugned order with a decreased penalty amount.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2016 07:00:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=415366" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 101 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271396</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the confiscation of the machinery and melting scrap but reduced the penalty from &amp;amp;8377; 3 lakhs to &amp;amp;8377; 50,000. The appellant&#039;s status as an actual user and lack of malafide intent were considered, leading to the reduction in penalty. The appeal was partly allowed, maintaining the impugned order with a decreased penalty amount.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271396</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>