<?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 (10) TMI 762 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349607</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that the appellant&#039;s rights to natural justice were violated as an ex parte order was issued without granting a personal hearing or considering their response. The appellant&#039;s request for cross-examination was denied, leading to a lack of adherence to natural justice principles. The case involved allegations of issuing a solvency certificate without verification, resulting in goods being diverted under the advance license scheme. The appellant was penalized under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, but they denied involvement in the diversion and argued for their innocence. The Tribunal directed for proper adherence to natural justice principles and further proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Oct 2017 11:01:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=492951" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (10) TMI 762 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349607</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that the appellant&#039;s rights to natural justice were violated as an ex parte order was issued without granting a personal hearing or considering their response. The appellant&#039;s request for cross-examination was denied, leading to a lack of adherence to natural justice principles. The case involved allegations of issuing a solvency certificate without verification, resulting in goods being diverted under the advance license scheme. The appellant was penalized under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, but they denied involvement in the diversion and argued for their innocence. The Tribunal directed for proper adherence to natural justice principles and further proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349607</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>