<?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>2015 (3) TMI 509 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257574</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that the penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 imposed by the Commissioner (Appeals) was not applicable due to the settlement reached by the main importer with the Settlement Commission. The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant, a Customs House Agent, citing legal precedents and principles of fairness.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2015 10:56:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=378759" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (3) TMI 509 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257574</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that the penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 imposed by the Commissioner (Appeals) was not applicable due to the settlement reached by the main importer with the Settlement Commission. The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant, a Customs House Agent, citing legal precedents and principles of fairness.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257574</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>