<?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 1224 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428279</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962, and allowed the appeal, as the evidence did not establish that the appellant had knowledge or reason to believe that the funds provided were used for smuggling gold.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2022 14:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=691966" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (9) TMI 1224 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428279</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962, and allowed the appeal, as the evidence did not establish that the appellant had knowledge or reason to believe that the funds provided were used for smuggling gold.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428279</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>