<?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>2022 (3) TMI 238 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419200</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalties imposed on the appellant firm and its partner, finding that their actions, though negligent, related to onions and not the prohibited Red Sanders logs. The Tribunal emphasized the custodian&#039;s responsibility for safe transportation of goods and distinguished the case from precedent where penalties were imposed without specifying relevant clauses. The appeals were allowed, and the penalties were overturned.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Mar 2022 14:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=672039" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (3) TMI 238 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419200</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalties imposed on the appellant firm and its partner, finding that their actions, though negligent, related to onions and not the prohibited Red Sanders logs. The Tribunal emphasized the custodian&#039;s responsibility for safe transportation of goods and distinguished the case from precedent where penalties were imposed without specifying relevant clauses. The appeals were allowed, and the penalties were overturned.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419200</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>