<?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>2014 (5) TMI 601 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247674</link>
    <description>The High Court set aside the penalty imposed on a Customs House Agent (CHA) under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Court ruled in favor of the appellant, canceling the penalty entirely due to the absence of malafide intent and technical non-compliance with regulations. The appellant&#039;s appeal was allowed based on the lack of evidence of contumacious conduct, leading to the overturning of the Tribunal&#039;s decision to uphold a reduced penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 May 2014 14:50:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=355939" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (5) TMI 601 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247674</link>
      <description>The High Court set aside the penalty imposed on a Customs House Agent (CHA) under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Court ruled in favor of the appellant, canceling the penalty entirely due to the absence of malafide intent and technical non-compliance with regulations. The appellant&#039;s appeal was allowed based on the lack of evidence of contumacious conduct, leading to the overturning of the Tribunal&#039;s decision to uphold a reduced penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247674</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>