<?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 (5) TMI 175 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327194</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld penalties and vehicle confiscation under Sections 112 and 115 of the Customs Act, 1962, due to strong evidence of smuggling activities. However, it reduced the redemption fine to 25% of auction price to account for vehicle depreciation, balancing justice and financial burden. The appellants&#039; appeals were partially allowed solely for the adjustment of the redemption fine.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 May 2016 00:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=426722" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 175 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327194</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld penalties and vehicle confiscation under Sections 112 and 115 of the Customs Act, 1962, due to strong evidence of smuggling activities. However, it reduced the redemption fine to 25% of auction price to account for vehicle depreciation, balancing justice and financial burden. The appellants&#039; appeals were partially allowed solely for the adjustment of the redemption fine.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327194</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>