<?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 1064 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176536</link>
    <description>The appeals involved penalties imposed on a Clearing &amp;amp; Shipping Agency (CHA) and a clearing clerk under Section 117 of the Customs Act. The Commissioner (Appeals) had reduced the clearing clerk&#039;s penalty. The CHA&#039;s role did not include valuation, and the Department had suspended the CHA&#039;s license. Notably, Sections 114 or 113 were not invoked for penalty imposition; instead, Section 117 was applied. The Member (T) found merit in waiving the pre-deposit of penalties for both appellants, leading to the stay of penalty recovery until the appeals&#039; disposal. Consequently, all four stay applications were allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2015 22:41:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=410260" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (3) TMI 1064 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176536</link>
      <description>The appeals involved penalties imposed on a Clearing &amp;amp; Shipping Agency (CHA) and a clearing clerk under Section 117 of the Customs Act. The Commissioner (Appeals) had reduced the clearing clerk&#039;s penalty. The CHA&#039;s role did not include valuation, and the Department had suspended the CHA&#039;s license. Notably, Sections 114 or 113 were not invoked for penalty imposition; instead, Section 117 was applied. The Member (T) found merit in waiving the pre-deposit of penalties for both appellants, leading to the stay of penalty recovery until the appeals&#039; disposal. Consequently, all four stay applications were allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176536</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>