<?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>2011 (7) TMI 402 - Bombay High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207442</link>
    <description>The court held that imposing penalties on both a partnership firm and its partners under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 is legally permissible. The court clarified that penalties imposed by different authorities for distinct contraventions do not amount to double jeopardy. The case was remanded to the tribunal for a fresh determination based on the specific facts of the case. The appeal was disposed of with no order as to costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2015 11:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=180921" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (7) TMI 402 - Bombay High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207442</link>
      <description>The court held that imposing penalties on both a partnership firm and its partners under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 is legally permissible. The court clarified that penalties imposed by different authorities for distinct contraventions do not amount to double jeopardy. The case was remanded to the tribunal for a fresh determination based on the specific facts of the case. The appeal was disposed of with no order as to costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207442</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>