<?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 (8) TMI 559 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118791</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty imposed on the appellant under the Customs Act for attempting to smuggle diamonds and foreign currency out of India. Despite contesting ownership of the seized items, evidence pointed to the appellant&#039;s involvement in the smuggling operation. The penalty amount was reduced from Rs. 1,00,00,000 to Rs. 10,00,000, considering the circumstances of the case and the appellant&#039;s role as a ground engineer with access to restricted aircraft areas.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Jul 2012 17:19:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=155788" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (8) TMI 559 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118791</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty imposed on the appellant under the Customs Act for attempting to smuggle diamonds and foreign currency out of India. Despite contesting ownership of the seized items, evidence pointed to the appellant&#039;s involvement in the smuggling operation. The penalty amount was reduced from Rs. 1,00,00,000 to Rs. 10,00,000, considering the circumstances of the case and the appellant&#039;s role as a ground engineer with access to restricted aircraft areas.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118791</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>