<?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>Customs broker cleared of penalties; no evidence of collusion in importing used digital photocopiers and printers.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=76267</link>
    <description>Imposition of penalties u/s 112(a) of the Customs Act 1962 on Customs broker - import of used Multifunction Digital Photocopiers and Printers - it is alleged that the appellant had connived with the importers - The Tribunal in its earlier order upheld confiscation of the goods but allowed redemption on payment of redemption fine and penalty on the enhanced value. - The Tribunal reviewed the evidence and found no proof of the appellant&#039;s involvement in the importation violations. As there was no penalty under Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, the penalty under Section 112(a) was not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2024 08:12:23 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2024 08:12:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=748835" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Customs broker cleared of penalties; no evidence of collusion in importing used digital photocopiers and printers.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=76267</link>
      <description>Imposition of penalties u/s 112(a) of the Customs Act 1962 on Customs broker - import of used Multifunction Digital Photocopiers and Printers - it is alleged that the appellant had connived with the importers - The Tribunal in its earlier order upheld confiscation of the goods but allowed redemption on payment of redemption fine and penalty on the enhanced value. - The Tribunal reviewed the evidence and found no proof of the appellant&#039;s involvement in the importation violations. As there was no penalty under Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, the penalty under Section 112(a) was not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2024 08:12:23 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=76267</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>