<?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 833 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340330</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that penalties imposed under Section 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 on a shipping company and its managing director for unloading consignments at Dubai instead of Africa were not justified. The appellants were not aware of any wrongdoing by the consignee, and the act of unloading at Dubai, as per consignee&#039;s request, did not breach the law. Therefore, the penalties were set aside, and the appeals were allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2018 12:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=461725" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 833 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340330</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that penalties imposed under Section 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 on a shipping company and its managing director for unloading consignments at Dubai instead of Africa were not justified. The appellants were not aware of any wrongdoing by the consignee, and the act of unloading at Dubai, as per consignee&#039;s request, did not breach the law. Therefore, the penalties were set aside, and the appeals were allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340330</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>