<?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 (8) TMI 459 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346401</link>
    <description>A later import restriction cannot be applied retrospectively to goods imported before it came into force. Used digital multifunctional printer and copier machines imported in December 2009 fell outside the restriction on second-hand photocopiers introduced only from 5 June 2012, and the factual distinction between the goods supported that classification. The confiscation and penalty were therefore unsustainable, and the impugned order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Aug 2017 12:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=485357" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 459 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346401</link>
      <description>A later import restriction cannot be applied retrospectively to goods imported before it came into force. Used digital multifunctional printer and copier machines imported in December 2009 fell outside the restriction on second-hand photocopiers introduced only from 5 June 2012, and the factual distinction between the goods supported that classification. The confiscation and penalty were therefore unsustainable, and the impugned order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346401</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>