<?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 (9) TMI 303 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33913</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the absolute confiscation of diamonds valued at Rs. 34,76,000 due to the appellant&#039;s conscious attempt to smuggle them without declaring to Customs. The confiscation of other goods and imposition of a penalty of Rs. 3,50,000 were also upheld. However, the case was remanded to the Commissioner for a fresh decision on redemption of the goods under Section 125 of the Customs Act, as the appellant was not given an opportunity to present a defense against absolute confiscation as required by law. The Commissioner was directed to exercise discretion judiciously and allow the appellant a reasonable opportunity to be heard.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72541" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (9) TMI 303 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33913</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the absolute confiscation of diamonds valued at Rs. 34,76,000 due to the appellant&#039;s conscious attempt to smuggle them without declaring to Customs. The confiscation of other goods and imposition of a penalty of Rs. 3,50,000 were also upheld. However, the case was remanded to the Commissioner for a fresh decision on redemption of the goods under Section 125 of the Customs Act, as the appellant was not given an opportunity to present a defense against absolute confiscation as required by law. The Commissioner was directed to exercise discretion judiciously and allow the appellant a reasonable opportunity to be heard.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33913</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>