<?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 (5) TMI 1015 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179916</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that the penalty imposed under Section 116 of the Customs Act, 1962, for the short-landing of timber logs was unjustified. Despite the short-landing being due to an accident and duty being paid on the entire quantity, the failure to seek an amendment to the Import General Manifest was the main issue. The Tribunal emphasized that penalty under Section 117 for not amending the IGM could have been appropriate, but penalty under Section 116 was unwarranted. As there was no evidence of mala fide intent and the possibility of an IGM amendment, the penalty was deemed unjustified, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Mar 2016 09:35:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=419894" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (5) TMI 1015 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179916</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that the penalty imposed under Section 116 of the Customs Act, 1962, for the short-landing of timber logs was unjustified. Despite the short-landing being due to an accident and duty being paid on the entire quantity, the failure to seek an amendment to the Import General Manifest was the main issue. The Tribunal emphasized that penalty under Section 117 for not amending the IGM could have been appropriate, but penalty under Section 116 was unwarranted. As there was no evidence of mala fide intent and the possibility of an IGM amendment, the penalty was deemed unjustified, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179916</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>