<?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>2018 (7) TMI 345 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363037</link>
    <description>Admitted misdeclaration of origin and manufacture in a mobile phone consignment attracted treaty-based restrictions on re-export of goods imported from third countries without manufacturing activity, so confiscation, redemption fine and penalty on the company were upheld. However, personal penalty on the authorised signatory was not sustained because the record did not show separate justification beyond his representative role, and that penalty was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2020 12:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=526010" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 345 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363037</link>
      <description>Admitted misdeclaration of origin and manufacture in a mobile phone consignment attracted treaty-based restrictions on re-export of goods imported from third countries without manufacturing activity, so confiscation, redemption fine and penalty on the company were upheld. However, personal penalty on the authorised signatory was not sustained because the record did not show separate justification beyond his representative role, and that penalty was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363037</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>