<?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>2008 (1) TMI 151 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4262</link>
    <description>Import of metal scrap without the prescribed pre-shipment certificate remained liable to confiscation and penalty because post-import customs examination did not cure the breach of the import policy. The absence of an inspection agency at the place of export was not accepted as a justification where inspection could have been arranged or shipment avoided. A valuation challenge raised for the first time at the appellate stage was not entertained because no dispute on valuation had been raised or decided in the original adjudication. The redemption fine and penalty were reduced, with consequential refund subject to unjust enrichment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=43605" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (1) TMI 151 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4262</link>
      <description>Import of metal scrap without the prescribed pre-shipment certificate remained liable to confiscation and penalty because post-import customs examination did not cure the breach of the import policy. The absence of an inspection agency at the place of export was not accepted as a justification where inspection could have been arranged or shipment avoided. A valuation challenge raised for the first time at the appellate stage was not entertained because no dispute on valuation had been raised or decided in the original adjudication. The redemption fine and penalty were reduced, with consequential refund subject to unjust enrichment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4262</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>