Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2017 (1) TMI 211 - AT - Customs

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Tribunal Upheld Penalties for Illegal Currency Export, Courier Company Penalty Reduced The Tribunal upheld the penalty imposed on the sub-agent for the illegal export of Indian currency. The penalty on the courier company was partially ...
                          Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                              Tribunal Upheld Penalties for Illegal Currency Export, Courier Company Penalty Reduced

                              The Tribunal upheld the penalty imposed on the sub-agent for the illegal export of Indian currency. The penalty on the courier company was partially allowed, reducing it to Rs. 50,000. The Tribunal found the Commissioner's decisions well-founded, dismissing the appeals and affirming the penalties based on thorough consideration of evidence and legal provisions.




                              Issues Involved:
                              1. Imposition of penalty on the courier company and its sub-agent for the export of Indian currency.
                              2. Legality of the statements obtained from the appellants.
                              3. Application of Section 6(3)(g) of FEMA, 1999.
                              4. Alleged violation of Section 113(b) and (h) of the Customs Act, 1962.
                              5. Due diligence under regulation 13(c) of the Courier Import and Export (Clearance) Regulations, 1998.

                              Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                              1. Imposition of Penalty on the Courier Company and Sub-Agent:
                              The appeals were filed against the imposition of penalties under Section 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962, due to the export of Indian currency by courier. The appellants contended that the currency was intended for domestic transfer but was erroneously forwarded for international export. The Tribunal found that the appellants' defenses were the same as those presented before the original adjudicating authority and had been adequately addressed and dismissed by the Commissioner. The Commissioner’s findings indicated that the appellants were involved in the illegal export of Indian currency, as evidenced by the detailed investigation and corroborated statements.

                              2. Legality of the Statements Obtained from the Appellants:
                              The sub-agent argued that the statements obtained from their employees were forcibly taken and identical, suggesting they were dictated. However, the Commissioner noted that the statements were voluntary and not coerced, as the appellant had made material changes and admissions in subsequent statements. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner’s observation that the statements were corroborated by other evidence and witnesses, including the appellant’s brother and employees.

                              3. Application of Section 6(3)(g) of FEMA, 1999:
                              The appellant argued that Section 6(3)(g) of FEMA, 1999, was wrongly invoked, asserting that sending Indian currency not exceeding Rs. 5,000/- was not prohibited. The Tribunal found that the Commissioner had adequately addressed this argument, noting that the currency was concealed and intended for illegal export, which justified the invocation of the relevant sections of the Customs Act.

                              4. Alleged Violation of Section 113(b) and (h) of the Customs Act, 1962:
                              The appellant contended that Section 113(b) and (h) could not be invoked as the currency was not prohibited for exportation. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner’s finding that the concealment of currency indicated an intention to illegally export it, thus justifying the application of these sections. The Commissioner’s detailed analysis and rejection of the appellant’s defense were found to be reasonable and supported by evidence.

                              5. Due Diligence under Regulation 13(c) of the Courier Import and Export (Clearance) Regulations, 1998:
                              The courier company argued that they had no knowledge of the currency hidden in the consignments and had not violated any regulations. The Tribunal noted that the Commissioner relied on regulation 13(c), which requires due diligence by courier companies. Although the currency was well-concealed, the Tribunal found a failure in due diligence on the courier company’s part. However, considering the circumstances, the Tribunal reduced the penalty from Rs. 2 lakhs to Rs. 50,000/-.

                              Conclusion:
                              The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the sub-agent, upholding the penalty imposed by the Commissioner. The appeal of the courier company was partially allowed, with the penalty reduced to Rs. 50,000/-. The Tribunal found that the Commissioner had adequately addressed all defenses raised by the appellants and that the penalties were justified based on the evidence and legal provisions.
                              Full Summary is available for active users!
                              Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                              Topics

                              ActsIncome Tax
                              No Records Found