<?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>Appeal dismissed; misdeclared imports held liable to confiscation under ss.111(l), 111(m) with fine under s.125 and penalties</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92910</link>
    <description>The CESTAT dismissed the appellant&#039;s challenge, upholding adjudication that goods were mis-declared affecting classification, valuation and anti-dumping duty liability; the Tribunal found the importer&#039;s first-check and wrongful-shipment defences unsubstantiated and held the goods liable to confiscation under ss.111(l) and 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962. The CESTAT affirmed that confiscation is antecedent to any redemption; permission to re-export does not preclude imposition of a redemption fine under s.125 or the levy of penalties, and therefore the adjudicating authority lawfully imposed confiscation, redemption fine and penalties. Appeal dismissed; impugned orders sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2025 08:34:37 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2025 08:34:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=855003" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Appeal dismissed; misdeclared imports held liable to confiscation under ss.111(l), 111(m) with fine under s.125 and penalties</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92910</link>
      <description>The CESTAT dismissed the appellant&#039;s challenge, upholding adjudication that goods were mis-declared affecting classification, valuation and anti-dumping duty liability; the Tribunal found the importer&#039;s first-check and wrongful-shipment defences unsubstantiated and held the goods liable to confiscation under ss.111(l) and 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962. The CESTAT affirmed that confiscation is antecedent to any redemption; permission to re-export does not preclude imposition of a redemption fine under s.125 or the levy of penalties, and therefore the adjudicating authority lawfully imposed confiscation, redemption fine and penalties. Appeal dismissed; impugned orders sustained.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2025 08:34:37 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92910</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>