<?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>2017 (1) TMI 74 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336994</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty imposed but recommended further examination of the 25% penalty reduction option. It ruled that the interest calculation was incorrect and needed to be recalculated based on specified rates. The redemption fine was dropped as the goods were unavailable and not provisionally released. The case was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for further action.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2022 14:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=453765" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 74 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336994</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty imposed but recommended further examination of the 25% penalty reduction option. It ruled that the interest calculation was incorrect and needed to be recalculated based on specified rates. The redemption fine was dropped as the goods were unavailable and not provisionally released. The case was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for further action.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336994</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>