<?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 873 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346815</link>
    <description>Footwear packages that omitted the required country-of-origin declaration were held liable to confiscation for non-compliance with Notification No. 1/64-Cus. However, where there was no mala fide intention, no undue benefit from the omission, and the importer was willing to comply once the requirement came to light, leniency was considered justified in fixing the consequential monetary sanctions. The violation was therefore maintained, but the redemption fine and penalty were reduced.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Aug 2017 07:50:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=486596" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 873 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346815</link>
      <description>Footwear packages that omitted the required country-of-origin declaration were held liable to confiscation for non-compliance with Notification No. 1/64-Cus. However, where there was no mala fide intention, no undue benefit from the omission, and the importer was willing to comply once the requirement came to light, leniency was considered justified in fixing the consequential monetary sanctions. The violation was therefore maintained, but the redemption fine and penalty were reduced.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346815</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>