<?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>2014 (10) TMI 1040 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295509</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on a Customs House Agent (CHA) under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal found insufficient evidence linking the CHA to the customs violations, noting the lack of direct proof of his involvement in filing shipping bills or controlling card holders. The appeal was allowed in favor of the CHA, as the Revenue&#039;s case lacked conclusive evidence of his direct participation in the alleged violations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Jun 2021 09:09:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=646208" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (10) TMI 1040 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295509</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on a Customs House Agent (CHA) under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal found insufficient evidence linking the CHA to the customs violations, noting the lack of direct proof of his involvement in filing shipping bills or controlling card holders. The appeal was allowed in favor of the CHA, as the Revenue&#039;s case lacked conclusive evidence of his direct participation in the alleged violations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295509</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>