<?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>2017 (3) TMI 286 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339783</link>
    <description>Cargo service providers under the Handling of Cargo in Customs Areas Regulations, 2009 must maintain access control, protect export cargo in custody, and ensure secure transit from the customs area to the port. On the facts, unauthorized access was accepted due to lack of corroboration for the access register, while unsecured movement of cargo, substitution during transit, and incomplete Form-13 particulars established regulatory breaches. The regulatory penalty was therefore sustained but reduced. A separate penalty under Section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962 could not be sustained because no specific violation of that Act had been identified, so that penalty was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Mar 2017 11:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=460511" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 286 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339783</link>
      <description>Cargo service providers under the Handling of Cargo in Customs Areas Regulations, 2009 must maintain access control, protect export cargo in custody, and ensure secure transit from the customs area to the port. On the facts, unauthorized access was accepted due to lack of corroboration for the access register, while unsecured movement of cargo, substitution during transit, and incomplete Form-13 particulars established regulatory breaches. The regulatory penalty was therefore sustained but reduced. A separate penalty under Section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962 could not be sustained because no specific violation of that Act had been identified, so that penalty was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339783</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>