<?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 981 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188212</link>
    <description>The tribunal found that while part of the consignment was different from what was declared, the appellant had ordered the correct goods and used them accordingly. Due to the misdeclaration of weight, confiscation was deemed justified, but the goods were not restricted, allowing for release upon payment of a reduced redemption fine and penalty. The tribunal considered the initial amounts excessive and adjusted them accordingly. The appeal was disposed of with these findings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2016 11:46:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=448654" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 981 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188212</link>
      <description>The tribunal found that while part of the consignment was different from what was declared, the appellant had ordered the correct goods and used them accordingly. Due to the misdeclaration of weight, confiscation was deemed justified, but the goods were not restricted, allowing for release upon payment of a reduced redemption fine and penalty. The tribunal considered the initial amounts excessive and adjusted them accordingly. The appeal was disposed of with these findings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188212</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>