<?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>2020 (1) TMI 981 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391368</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, upholding the demand for duty and interest but setting aside orders for confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty. The decision highlighted the significance of complying with post-importation conditions and maintaining accurate inventory records. It also stressed procedural fairness in imposing penalties and fines, considering factors such as the appellant&#039;s management of a substantial inventory and its status as a Public Sector Undertaking.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 26 Jan 2020 09:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=601546" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (1) TMI 981 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391368</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, upholding the demand for duty and interest but setting aside orders for confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty. The decision highlighted the significance of complying with post-importation conditions and maintaining accurate inventory records. It also stressed procedural fairness in imposing penalties and fines, considering factors such as the appellant&#039;s management of a substantial inventory and its status as a Public Sector Undertaking.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391368</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>