<?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>2010 (7) TMI 378 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202261</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to set aside penalties on partners of a partnership firm under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Court agreed with the Tribunal that separate penalties on partners were not justified when the firm itself was penalized, unless explicitly provided by the legislature. The judgment emphasized the legal distinction between partnership firms and companies regarding penalty provisions, leading to the dismissal of the appeals challenging the penalties on the partners.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Feb 2011 11:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=175849" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (7) TMI 378 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202261</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to set aside penalties on partners of a partnership firm under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Court agreed with the Tribunal that separate penalties on partners were not justified when the firm itself was penalized, unless explicitly provided by the legislature. The judgment emphasized the legal distinction between partnership firms and companies regarding penalty provisions, leading to the dismissal of the appeals challenging the penalties on the partners.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202261</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>