<?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 573 - CESTAT BANGLORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449422</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal by setting aside the revocation of the Customs Broker&#039;s license and the forfeiture of the security deposit, acknowledging the appellant&#039;s online verification of the exporter&#039;s genuineness. However, it upheld the Rs. 50,000 penalty for failing to verify the exporter&#039;s genuineness adequately, despite the appellant&#039;s good faith efforts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2024 15:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=743322" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 573 - CESTAT BANGLORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449422</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal by setting aside the revocation of the Customs Broker&#039;s license and the forfeiture of the security deposit, acknowledging the appellant&#039;s online verification of the exporter&#039;s genuineness. However, it upheld the Rs. 50,000 penalty for failing to verify the exporter&#039;s genuineness adequately, despite the appellant&#039;s good faith efforts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449422</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>