<?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 (2) TMI 1009 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392565</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed under Section 114AA of the Customs Act against a Custom House agent for importing branded cosmetics without complying with registration requirements. The decision emphasized the lack of evidence showing intentional wrongdoing or malafide intent on the agent&#039;s part, highlighting the importance of proving knowledge and deliberate wrongdoing before imposing penalties for non-compliance with regulatory rules.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2020 11:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=604877" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 1009 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392565</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed under Section 114AA of the Customs Act against a Custom House agent for importing branded cosmetics without complying with registration requirements. The decision emphasized the lack of evidence showing intentional wrongdoing or malafide intent on the agent&#039;s part, highlighting the importance of proving knowledge and deliberate wrongdoing before imposing penalties for non-compliance with regulatory rules.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392565</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>