<?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>2004 (10) TMI 205 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53505</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the importer, overturning the confiscation and penalty due to the lack of misdeclaration evidence. The re-export of the goods was permitted as the goods were not liable to confiscation under Section 111. The decision emphasized the significance of accurate documentation matching the declared goods to avoid misdeclaration allegations and subsequent penalties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Oct 2010 16:14:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91982" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (10) TMI 205 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53505</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the importer, overturning the confiscation and penalty due to the lack of misdeclaration evidence. The re-export of the goods was permitted as the goods were not liable to confiscation under Section 111. The decision emphasized the significance of accurate documentation matching the declared goods to avoid misdeclaration allegations and subsequent penalties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53505</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>