<?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 1118 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342148</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the reduction of the redemption fine from &amp;amp;8377; 9,93,000 to &amp;amp;8377; 1,50,000 and the penalty from &amp;amp;8377; 4 lakhs to &amp;amp;8377; 50,000 in a case involving overvaluation of goods for export. Despite arguments against the redemption fine under section 125, the Tribunal found it justifiable, stating the provision covers infractions in both importation and exportation. The Tribunal affirmed the penalty imposition under section 114, considering the exporter&#039;s conduct. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, with the Tribunal finding the reduced penalty and redemption fine appropriate while upholding the imposition of penalties and redemption fines.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Jun 2017 14:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=466920" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (4) TMI 1118 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342148</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the reduction of the redemption fine from &amp;amp;8377; 9,93,000 to &amp;amp;8377; 1,50,000 and the penalty from &amp;amp;8377; 4 lakhs to &amp;amp;8377; 50,000 in a case involving overvaluation of goods for export. Despite arguments against the redemption fine under section 125, the Tribunal found it justifiable, stating the provision covers infractions in both importation and exportation. The Tribunal affirmed the penalty imposition under section 114, considering the exporter&#039;s conduct. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, with the Tribunal finding the reduced penalty and redemption fine appropriate while upholding the imposition of penalties and redemption fines.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342148</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>