<?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 (6) TMI 159 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248255</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to impose a redemption fine of Rs. 20 lakhs on confiscated diamonds, despite not penalizing the petitioner, based on the unauthorized removal of diamonds by the petitioner&#039;s manager. The Court found the Tribunal&#039;s decision reasonable, considering the market value of the diamonds and the petitioner&#039;s conduct. The Court dismissed the petitioner&#039;s arguments regarding duty liability, employee actions, and the employer&#039;s responsibility for redemption fines, emphasizing the company&#039;s liability for its employees&#039; actions. The petition was ultimately dismissed as no legal questions arose from the Tribunal&#039;s order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Nov 2014 14:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=357027" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (6) TMI 159 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248255</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to impose a redemption fine of Rs. 20 lakhs on confiscated diamonds, despite not penalizing the petitioner, based on the unauthorized removal of diamonds by the petitioner&#039;s manager. The Court found the Tribunal&#039;s decision reasonable, considering the market value of the diamonds and the petitioner&#039;s conduct. The Court dismissed the petitioner&#039;s arguments regarding duty liability, employee actions, and the employer&#039;s responsibility for redemption fines, emphasizing the company&#039;s liability for its employees&#039; actions. The petition was ultimately dismissed as no legal questions arose from the Tribunal&#039;s order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248255</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>