<?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>2009 (7) TMI 884 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208134</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal against Trilok Nath Mittal, finding him not liable for penalty under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act as he had no involvement with the goods. The penalty imposed on him was set aside. In the case of Pawan Kumar Gupta, the penalty was reduced from 1.5 crores to 5 lakhs due to his involvement in handling the goods. The Court upheld the penalty against Gupta, directing each party to bear their own costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2012 13:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=181605" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (7) TMI 884 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208134</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal against Trilok Nath Mittal, finding him not liable for penalty under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act as he had no involvement with the goods. The penalty imposed on him was set aside. In the case of Pawan Kumar Gupta, the penalty was reduced from 1.5 crores to 5 lakhs due to his involvement in handling the goods. The Court upheld the penalty against Gupta, directing each party to bear their own costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208134</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>