<?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 (5) TMI 1534 - COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (APPEALS), MUMBAI-III</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198911</link>
    <description>The appellant&#039;s appeal was successful as the court found the absolute confiscation of gold inconsistent with Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962, and established judicial precedents. The appellant was granted the opportunity to redeem the gold by paying a fine of Rs. 1,00,000 and applicable duty. However, the penalty of Rs. 60,000 imposed on the appellant under the Customs Act was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Feb 2018 09:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=508801" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 1534 - COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (APPEALS), MUMBAI-III</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198911</link>
      <description>The appellant&#039;s appeal was successful as the court found the absolute confiscation of gold inconsistent with Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962, and established judicial precedents. The appellant was granted the opportunity to redeem the gold by paying a fine of Rs. 1,00,000 and applicable duty. However, the penalty of Rs. 60,000 imposed on the appellant under the Customs Act was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198911</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>