<?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 (7) TMI 371 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424816</link>
    <description>Statements relied on by customs authorities are not admissible where the witnesses are not examined and cross-examination is denied, because section 138B of the Customs Act and fair hearing safeguards are not met. On the export allegation, documentary records showing Iranian buyers and supporting destination documents, together with absence of reliable proof of diversion to the UAE, did not establish misdeclaration, so confiscation and penalties were unsustainable. Penalties on the exporters and CHA/freight agent were also not justified, since any post-export foreign trade or foreign exchange compliance issue lay with the competent specialist authorities and no independent wrongdoing or mens rea was proved against the intermediaries.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Jul 2022 15:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=684500" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (7) TMI 371 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424816</link>
      <description>Statements relied on by customs authorities are not admissible where the witnesses are not examined and cross-examination is denied, because section 138B of the Customs Act and fair hearing safeguards are not met. On the export allegation, documentary records showing Iranian buyers and supporting destination documents, together with absence of reliable proof of diversion to the UAE, did not establish misdeclaration, so confiscation and penalties were unsustainable. Penalties on the exporters and CHA/freight agent were also not justified, since any post-export foreign trade or foreign exchange compliance issue lay with the competent specialist authorities and no independent wrongdoing or mens rea was proved against the intermediaries.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424816</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>