<?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>1996 (10) TMI 89 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44360</link>
    <description>Confiscation of an unauthorisedly imported tapping machine was upheld under the Customs Act, 1962, and the only surviving issue was whether the redemption fine was excessive. The Court found the fine to be on the higher side having regard to the machine&#039;s value at the relevant date. It accepted the Tribunal&#039;s discretion to reduce the fine on the basis that the original amount was exorbitant and disproportionate, and found no reason to interfere on the facts. The Revenue&#039;s challenge to the reduction therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Dec 2013 16:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=82889" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (10) TMI 89 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44360</link>
      <description>Confiscation of an unauthorisedly imported tapping machine was upheld under the Customs Act, 1962, and the only surviving issue was whether the redemption fine was excessive. The Court found the fine to be on the higher side having regard to the machine&#039;s value at the relevant date. It accepted the Tribunal&#039;s discretion to reduce the fine on the basis that the original amount was exorbitant and disproportionate, and found no reason to interfere on the facts. The Revenue&#039;s challenge to the reduction therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44360</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>