<?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>1997 (6) TMI 249 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93318</link>
    <description>Section 129A(2) of the Customs Act does not apply where the Collector of Customs himself files the departmental appeal; that objection therefore fails. On the penalty issue, inculpatory statements and a confessional statement were considered insufficient without independent corroboration linking the respondent to the smuggling or showing a definite role in the operation. The absence of incriminating recovery from the respondent&#039;s residence and the lack of reliable supporting material entitled him to the benefit of doubt, so the personal penalty could not be sustained. The appellate order setting aside confiscation and penalty was affirmed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2011 18:12:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=130379" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (6) TMI 249 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93318</link>
      <description>Section 129A(2) of the Customs Act does not apply where the Collector of Customs himself files the departmental appeal; that objection therefore fails. On the penalty issue, inculpatory statements and a confessional statement were considered insufficient without independent corroboration linking the respondent to the smuggling or showing a definite role in the operation. The absence of incriminating recovery from the respondent&#039;s residence and the lack of reliable supporting material entitled him to the benefit of doubt, so the personal penalty could not be sustained. The appellate order setting aside confiscation and penalty was affirmed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93318</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>