<?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>2000 (8) TMI 228 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50342</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals in a case involving misdeclaration of the value of imported goods, recovery of differential duty, and imposition of penalties under the Customs Act. The Tribunal found the evidence presented by the department to be insufficient to prove the alleged payments, highlighting discrepancies and lack of corroborative evidence. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, granting relief to the appellant in accordance with the law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Aug 2010 12:01:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=88822" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (8) TMI 228 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50342</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals in a case involving misdeclaration of the value of imported goods, recovery of differential duty, and imposition of penalties under the Customs Act. The Tribunal found the evidence presented by the department to be insufficient to prove the alleged payments, highlighting discrepancies and lack of corroborative evidence. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, granting relief to the appellant in accordance with the law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50342</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>