<?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 833 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327852</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039; decision to only address the personal penalty issue and remanded the case for a fresh order considering all issues, including confiscation and redemption fine. The Tribunal emphasized that the Commissioner (Appeals) should review the evidence, including the crucial test report, and determine the sustainability of the redemption fine and penalty in the context of the confiscated goods not being returned.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2016 10:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=428956" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 833 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327852</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039; decision to only address the personal penalty issue and remanded the case for a fresh order considering all issues, including confiscation and redemption fine. The Tribunal emphasized that the Commissioner (Appeals) should review the evidence, including the crucial test report, and determine the sustainability of the redemption fine and penalty in the context of the confiscated goods not being returned.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327852</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>