<?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 (2) TMI 104 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4476</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the enhanced CIF value of a secondhand sailboat, upheld the confiscation under Section 111(d) due to lack of a specific import license, set aside confiscation under Section 111(f) for IGM amendments, and dismissed undervaluation charges under Section 111(m). The penalty imposed under Section 112(a) was reduced and ultimately set aside due to lack of mens rea. The Tribunal&#039;s decision showcased a meticulous legal analysis, leading to a fair outcome in the case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Oct 2019 16:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=43818" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (2) TMI 104 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4476</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the enhanced CIF value of a secondhand sailboat, upheld the confiscation under Section 111(d) due to lack of a specific import license, set aside confiscation under Section 111(f) for IGM amendments, and dismissed undervaluation charges under Section 111(m). The penalty imposed under Section 112(a) was reduced and ultimately set aside due to lack of mens rea. The Tribunal&#039;s decision showcased a meticulous legal analysis, leading to a fair outcome in the case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4476</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>