<?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>2018 (4) TMI 1701 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280531</link>
    <description>The penalties imposed under sections 112 and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962 for smuggling goods through courier mode were challenged in this case. The court found that the penalties were not sustainable due to the lack of incriminating evidence beyond statements and the failure to demonstrate the individual-Directors&#039; involvement. As a result, the penalties were set aside, and the appeals were allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 May 2019 05:56:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=570355" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (4) TMI 1701 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280531</link>
      <description>The penalties imposed under sections 112 and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962 for smuggling goods through courier mode were challenged in this case. The court found that the penalties were not sustainable due to the lack of incriminating evidence beyond statements and the failure to demonstrate the individual-Directors&#039; involvement. As a result, the penalties were set aside, and the appeals were allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280531</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>