<?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>2008 (3) TMI 273 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31619</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the adjudication order in a case concerning the enhancement of imported goods&#039; value, where the appellant&#039;s consent and waiver of rights precluded challenging the valuation post-adjudication. The Tribunal found the appellant&#039;s objections unsubstantiated, emphasizing the clear consent given and due process followed. It concluded that the adjudication order was valid, noting the appellant&#039;s decision to forgo the right to reply to the Show Cause Notice. The Tribunal reduced the redemption fine but rejected the appeal, citing the absence of clear evidence of mala fide intention in the under-valuation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70266" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (3) TMI 273 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31619</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the adjudication order in a case concerning the enhancement of imported goods&#039; value, where the appellant&#039;s consent and waiver of rights precluded challenging the valuation post-adjudication. The Tribunal found the appellant&#039;s objections unsubstantiated, emphasizing the clear consent given and due process followed. It concluded that the adjudication order was valid, noting the appellant&#039;s decision to forgo the right to reply to the Show Cause Notice. The Tribunal reduced the redemption fine but rejected the appeal, citing the absence of clear evidence of mala fide intention in the under-valuation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31619</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>