<?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>2003 (3) TMI 218 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52169</link>
    <description>An exemption notification and corresponding import policy required the importer to bring goods of the prescribed minimum CIF value within the licence validity period. Non-fulfilment of that condition attracted confiscation, duty and interest. A later DGFT communication treating conversion of a zero-duty licence into a 15% duty licence as retrospective, and waiving interest, could not override the notification because amendment power lay with the issuing authority. The document also notes that while confiscation and penal consequences were upheld in principle, the redemption fine and penalty were considered excessive on the facts and reduced.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 10:08:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90647" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (3) TMI 218 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52169</link>
      <description>An exemption notification and corresponding import policy required the importer to bring goods of the prescribed minimum CIF value within the licence validity period. Non-fulfilment of that condition attracted confiscation, duty and interest. A later DGFT communication treating conversion of a zero-duty licence into a 15% duty licence as retrospective, and waiving interest, could not override the notification because amendment power lay with the issuing authority. The document also notes that while confiscation and penal consequences were upheld in principle, the redemption fine and penalty were considered excessive on the facts and reduced.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52169</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>