<?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 (9) TMI 1387 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196001</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of M/s. Nangalia Impex, overturning the confiscation of goods provisionally cleared under the DEPB scheme and the imposition of penalties. The Tribunal found that the Revenue failed to conduct a market enquiry or provide evidence of contemporary exports, leading to the lack of establishment of the case against the appellant. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and no penalties were imposed on the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Nov 2017 06:54:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=496450" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 1387 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196001</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of M/s. Nangalia Impex, overturning the confiscation of goods provisionally cleared under the DEPB scheme and the imposition of penalties. The Tribunal found that the Revenue failed to conduct a market enquiry or provide evidence of contemporary exports, leading to the lack of establishment of the case against the appellant. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and no penalties were imposed on the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196001</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>