<?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>2009 (4) TMI 158 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35115</link>
    <description>The appellate tribunal upheld the confiscation of foreign currency under Sections 111(d) and (o) of the Customs Act, reducing the fine and penalty amounts. The tribunal found the appellant in breach of Section 77 for failing to declare the currency upon arrival, despite later filing a Currency Declaration Form. The penalty under Section 112(a) was upheld but reduced, with the appeal disposed of affirming the Commissioner&#039;s order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=73719" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (4) TMI 158 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35115</link>
      <description>The appellate tribunal upheld the confiscation of foreign currency under Sections 111(d) and (o) of the Customs Act, reducing the fine and penalty amounts. The tribunal found the appellant in breach of Section 77 for failing to declare the currency upon arrival, despite later filing a Currency Declaration Form. The penalty under Section 112(a) was upheld but reduced, with the appeal disposed of affirming the Commissioner&#039;s order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35115</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>