<?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 (9) TMI 227 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427282</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decision not to impose penalties under Section 112 on specific individuals. Penalties imposed on certain individuals and entities were found unjustified and set aside. The recovery of the demanded differential duty and interest was deemed unsustainable as it could only be demanded from the actual importer. Allegations of undervaluation and related penalties were not upheld due to procedural irregularities. The Tribunal concluded that penalties under various sections of the Customs Act were unsustainable, and the customs broker was not found responsible for undervaluation. The appeals by the appellants were allowed, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Sep 2022 13:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=689863" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (9) TMI 227 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427282</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decision not to impose penalties under Section 112 on specific individuals. Penalties imposed on certain individuals and entities were found unjustified and set aside. The recovery of the demanded differential duty and interest was deemed unsustainable as it could only be demanded from the actual importer. Allegations of undervaluation and related penalties were not upheld due to procedural irregularities. The Tribunal concluded that penalties under various sections of the Customs Act were unsustainable, and the customs broker was not found responsible for undervaluation. The appeals by the appellants were allowed, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427282</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>