<?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>2007 (2) TMI 16 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1247</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal upheld the penalty of Rs.25,000/- imposed on the Customs House Agent (CHA) by the Commissioner under Section 114 of the Customs Act. Despite the goods being physically exported, the Tribunal clarified that confiscation liability persists post-exportation. Noting discrepancies and the CHA&#039;s conduct, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, emphasizing compliance with Customs regulations to avoid penalties and confiscation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 15:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40659" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (2) TMI 16 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1247</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal upheld the penalty of Rs.25,000/- imposed on the Customs House Agent (CHA) by the Commissioner under Section 114 of the Customs Act. Despite the goods being physically exported, the Tribunal clarified that confiscation liability persists post-exportation. Noting discrepancies and the CHA&#039;s conduct, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, emphasizing compliance with Customs regulations to avoid penalties and confiscation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1247</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>