<?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>2024 (2) TMI 96 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448945</link>
    <description>Export of Alprazolam tablets requires mandatory export authorisation because the substance falls within the NDPS schedule of psychotropic substances. In the absence of such authorisation, the goods are liable to confiscation under Section 113(d) of the Customs Act read with Section 8 of the NDPS Act and Rule 58 of the NDPS Rules, and penalty under Section 114(i) follows once confiscation is attracted. Past exports and earlier departmental inaction do not excuse later unauthorised exports. Mens rea is not required for penalty under Section 114(i), and limitation was held inapplicable on the facts discussed; the penalty was reduced in amount but the liability principle was maintained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Feb 2024 07:50:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=742187" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 96 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448945</link>
      <description>Export of Alprazolam tablets requires mandatory export authorisation because the substance falls within the NDPS schedule of psychotropic substances. In the absence of such authorisation, the goods are liable to confiscation under Section 113(d) of the Customs Act read with Section 8 of the NDPS Act and Rule 58 of the NDPS Rules, and penalty under Section 114(i) follows once confiscation is attracted. Past exports and earlier departmental inaction do not excuse later unauthorised exports. Mens rea is not required for penalty under Section 114(i), and limitation was held inapplicable on the facts discussed; the penalty was reduced in amount but the liability principle was maintained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448945</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>