<?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>2019 (6) TMI 970 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381893</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the order of confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty, upholding only the duty paid as per the tariff value. It concluded that the imported Betal Nuts were not prohibited goods and, therefore, not liable for confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal emphasized that the goods were cleared after paying duty based on the tariff value, following the interpretation of the relevant Notification and provisions of the Customs Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2019 10:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=576011" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (6) TMI 970 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381893</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the order of confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty, upholding only the duty paid as per the tariff value. It concluded that the imported Betal Nuts were not prohibited goods and, therefore, not liable for confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal emphasized that the goods were cleared after paying duty based on the tariff value, following the interpretation of the relevant Notification and provisions of the Customs Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381893</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>