<?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 (4) TMI 259 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341289</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside penalties imposed on a customs house agent and its employee under section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962 for allegedly fraudulent exports of ready-made garments. The appellants were found not proven to be aware or involved in the fraudulent activities related to the exports. Despite misdeclaration of goods, the Tribunal ruled that mere filing of bills or handling goods subject to confiscation did not warrant penalties without evidence of awareness or participation in the fraud. Therefore, the penalties totaling to Rs. 11,00,000 and Rs. 7,25,000 were annulled due to lack of proof of the appellants&#039; involvement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2018 11:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=464917" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (4) TMI 259 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341289</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside penalties imposed on a customs house agent and its employee under section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962 for allegedly fraudulent exports of ready-made garments. The appellants were found not proven to be aware or involved in the fraudulent activities related to the exports. Despite misdeclaration of goods, the Tribunal ruled that mere filing of bills or handling goods subject to confiscation did not warrant penalties without evidence of awareness or participation in the fraud. Therefore, the penalties totaling to Rs. 11,00,000 and Rs. 7,25,000 were annulled due to lack of proof of the appellants&#039; involvement.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341289</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>