<?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 (9) TMI 134 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398015</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the order, ruling that the appellant was not required to prove the recovery of gold as it was not established. The confiscation of the mobile phone and Indian currency was deemed unjustified, and the penalty imposition was unwarranted. The appellant&#039;s appeal was allowed, granting consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Sep 2020 17:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=621425" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (9) TMI 134 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398015</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the order, ruling that the appellant was not required to prove the recovery of gold as it was not established. The confiscation of the mobile phone and Indian currency was deemed unjustified, and the penalty imposition was unwarranted. The appellant&#039;s appeal was allowed, granting consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398015</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>