<?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>2020 (1) TMI 950 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391337</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to reduce the penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962, while setting aside the penalty under Section 114AA. The Court emphasized the lack of bonafides in the import activities and the discretion of fact-finding bodies in penalty imposition. The Tribunal&#039;s reduction of the penalty was deemed fair and lenient, leading to the dismissal of the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 Jan 2020 12:17:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=601475" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (1) TMI 950 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391337</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to reduce the penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962, while setting aside the penalty under Section 114AA. The Court emphasized the lack of bonafides in the import activities and the discretion of fact-finding bodies in penalty imposition. The Tribunal&#039;s reduction of the penalty was deemed fair and lenient, leading to the dismissal of the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391337</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>