<?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 (12) TMI 573 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335928</link>
    <description>The appellate tribunal set aside the penalty of &amp;amp;8377; 25,000 imposed on the appellant under section 112(b) of the Customs Act 1962 for purchasing an undervalued superbike imported by another party. The tribunal found no evidence implicating the appellant in the undervaluation or illegal import, leading to the decision to overturn the penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2018 12:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=451323" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 573 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335928</link>
      <description>The appellate tribunal set aside the penalty of &amp;amp;8377; 25,000 imposed on the appellant under section 112(b) of the Customs Act 1962 for purchasing an undervalued superbike imported by another party. The tribunal found no evidence implicating the appellant in the undervaluation or illegal import, leading to the decision to overturn the penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335928</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>