<?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>2016 (2) TMI 649 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271944</link>
    <description>The appeals filed by Sh. Sanjay Saha alias Sona Saha and Sh. Chabi Mondal were dismissed, upholding the penalties imposed under Sec-114(i) of the Customs Act 1962. However, the appeal filed by Sh. Shib Shankar Dutta, the owner of the seized vehicle, was allowed due to lack of evidence proving his knowledge of the smuggling activities. The judgment emphasized the importance of concrete proof in determining penalties for involvement in smuggling activities.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2016 10:29:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=417178" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 649 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271944</link>
      <description>The appeals filed by Sh. Sanjay Saha alias Sona Saha and Sh. Chabi Mondal were dismissed, upholding the penalties imposed under Sec-114(i) of the Customs Act 1962. However, the appeal filed by Sh. Shib Shankar Dutta, the owner of the seized vehicle, was allowed due to lack of evidence proving his knowledge of the smuggling activities. The judgment emphasized the importance of concrete proof in determining penalties for involvement in smuggling activities.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271944</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>