<?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 1319 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450168</link>
    <description>CESTAT New Delhi upheld customs duty demand against CONCOR under section 45(3) after imported goods were pilfered from their custody. The container&#039;s customs seal was broken and replaced with an unnumbered private red seal, resulting in loss of goods valued at Rs. 5,93,25,481. The court imposed Rs. 1 lakh penalty on CONCOR under section 117 for inadequate care. The importer was penalized under sections 112(a) and 114AA for knowingly mis-declaring glass chatons as glass beads after examining samples. Goods were held liable for confiscation under section 111, though actual confiscation was impossible due to pilferage. All appeals were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 26 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Oct 2024 13:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=745183" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 1319 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450168</link>
      <description>CESTAT New Delhi upheld customs duty demand against CONCOR under section 45(3) after imported goods were pilfered from their custody. The container&#039;s customs seal was broken and replaced with an unnumbered private red seal, resulting in loss of goods valued at Rs. 5,93,25,481. The court imposed Rs. 1 lakh penalty on CONCOR under section 117 for inadequate care. The importer was penalized under sections 112(a) and 114AA for knowingly mis-declaring glass chatons as glass beads after examining samples. Goods were held liable for confiscation under section 111, though actual confiscation was impossible due to pilferage. All appeals were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450168</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>