<?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>2005 (5) TMI 145 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54154</link>
    <description>Import confiscation under the Customs Act was treated as unsustainable where the vehicle&#039;s prescribed certification requirement was later satisfied and the importer was not shown to be responsible for the alleged non-compliance. The record also indicated that provisional assessment had been contemplated but not made, and the compliance obligation was considered to rest on the dealer rather than the importer. As confiscation failed, the accompanying penalty had no independent basis and was likewise unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2010 12:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=92631" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (5) TMI 145 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54154</link>
      <description>Import confiscation under the Customs Act was treated as unsustainable where the vehicle&#039;s prescribed certification requirement was later satisfied and the importer was not shown to be responsible for the alleged non-compliance. The record also indicated that provisional assessment had been contemplated but not made, and the compliance obligation was considered to rest on the dealer rather than the importer. As confiscation failed, the accompanying penalty had no independent basis and was likewise unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54154</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>