<?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 (10) TMI 184 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399210</link>
    <description>Used multifunction devices were not shown to fall within the amended compulsory registration schedule for printers, scanners, copying machines or duplicators, so the registration requirement did not apply. On the customs and trade compliance issues, multifunction devices were treated as restricted rather than prohibited goods, redemption under the Customs Act remained available where confiscation was otherwise justified, and substantial compliance with hazardous waste and foreign trade requirements was accepted; the matter was therefore fit for adjudication of redemption fine and penalty rather than absolute confiscation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 May 2021 10:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=624208" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (10) TMI 184 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399210</link>
      <description>Used multifunction devices were not shown to fall within the amended compulsory registration schedule for printers, scanners, copying machines or duplicators, so the registration requirement did not apply. On the customs and trade compliance issues, multifunction devices were treated as restricted rather than prohibited goods, redemption under the Customs Act remained available where confiscation was otherwise justified, and substantial compliance with hazardous waste and foreign trade requirements was accepted; the matter was therefore fit for adjudication of redemption fine and penalty rather than absolute confiscation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399210</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>