<?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>2019 (5) TMI 78 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379350</link>
    <description>Penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 was held unwarranted where confiscation of the goods was ordered but the importer&#039;s conduct was found bona fide. The authorities noted no negligence, deliberate defiance, contumacious conduct, or conscious disregard of statutory duty, and treated the absence of a contravention attracting penalty as justified. On that basis, the imposition of penalty was declined and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 May 2019 09:58:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=569123" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (5) TMI 78 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379350</link>
      <description>Penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 was held unwarranted where confiscation of the goods was ordered but the importer&#039;s conduct was found bona fide. The authorities noted no negligence, deliberate defiance, contumacious conduct, or conscious disregard of statutory duty, and treated the absence of a contravention attracting penalty as justified. On that basis, the imposition of penalty was declined and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379350</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>