<?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 151 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54167</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Appellant regarding the jurisdiction of Customs Authorities over survey equipment on board a vessel. It determined that the survey equipment, essential for the vessel&#039;s survey operations, should be classified as ship stores or filaments, not cargo subject to duty demands or confiscation under the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal held that duty demands on ship stores leaving an Indian port were not applicable, and penalties imposed by the Commissioner were set aside. Confiscation of the survey equipment under Sections 111(f) and 111(l) was deemed invalid due to its classification as ship stores or filaments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:07:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=92644" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (5) TMI 151 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54167</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Appellant regarding the jurisdiction of Customs Authorities over survey equipment on board a vessel. It determined that the survey equipment, essential for the vessel&#039;s survey operations, should be classified as ship stores or filaments, not cargo subject to duty demands or confiscation under the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal held that duty demands on ship stores leaving an Indian port were not applicable, and penalties imposed by the Commissioner were set aside. Confiscation of the survey equipment under Sections 111(f) and 111(l) was deemed invalid due to its classification as ship stores or filaments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54167</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>