<?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 204 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449053</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that the Department did not adequately prove the case for imposing penalties on the Appellants under Section 112(b)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962. Consequently, the penalties were set aside, and the Appeals were allowed. The order for absolute confiscation of the gold bars was upheld, as it was not contested by the Appellants. The Appeals were thus disposed of with the penalties removed, maintaining the confiscation order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Feb 2024 08:43:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=742420" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 204 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449053</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that the Department did not adequately prove the case for imposing penalties on the Appellants under Section 112(b)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962. Consequently, the penalties were set aside, and the Appeals were allowed. The order for absolute confiscation of the gold bars was upheld, as it was not contested by the Appellants. The Appeals were thus disposed of with the penalties removed, maintaining the confiscation order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449053</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>