https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344894 The Judicial Member upheld the penalty imposition on the appellants for contravening export regulations by exporting non-basmati rice in violation of the ban. Despite the appellants admitting to the violations, they justified their actions based on alleged coercion by buyers and a belief in the ban being temporary. The defense argued against revenue loss and disclosed full transaction details. However, the Revenue defended the penalty imposition, citing admitted misdeclaration and violation of the export ban. The judgment referenced legal precedents and dismissed both appeals, affirming the penalty imposition based on findings similar to a previous Allahabad High Court decision and a related Supreme Court dismissal. en-us Tue, 27 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Jul 2017 11:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344894 The Judicial Member upheld the penalty imposition on the appellants for contravening export regulations by exporting non-basmati rice in violation of the ban. Despite the appellants admitting to the violations, they justified their actions based on alleged coercion by buyers and a belief in the ban being temporary. The defense argued against revenue loss and disclosed full transaction details. However, the Revenue defended the penalty imposition, citing admitted misdeclaration and violation of the export ban. The judgment referenced legal precedents and dismissed both appeals, affirming the penalty imposition based on findings similar to a previous Allahabad High Court decision and a related Supreme Court dismissal. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 27 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344894