<?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 (8) TMI 215 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756511</link>
    <description>Penalties under the Customs Act, 1962 and FEMA were found unsustainable against a licensed money exchanger where the record did not establish intentional connivance in alleged illegal export of foreign currency or illegal import of gold. Call records and co-noticees&#039; statements were held insufficient, without reliable independent evidence, to show participation in smuggling or deliberate facilitation. A lapse of exchanging currency without issuing an invoice was treated as a regulatory non-compliance issue, but not by itself as a statutory contravention attracting Customs penalties under sections 114, 114AA, or 117. The FEMA penalty also lacked support in the impugned order, and the penalties were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Aug 2024 07:05:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=762868" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (8) TMI 215 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756511</link>
      <description>Penalties under the Customs Act, 1962 and FEMA were found unsustainable against a licensed money exchanger where the record did not establish intentional connivance in alleged illegal export of foreign currency or illegal import of gold. Call records and co-noticees&#039; statements were held insufficient, without reliable independent evidence, to show participation in smuggling or deliberate facilitation. A lapse of exchanging currency without issuing an invoice was treated as a regulatory non-compliance issue, but not by itself as a statutory contravention attracting Customs penalties under sections 114, 114AA, or 117. The FEMA penalty also lacked support in the impugned order, and the penalties were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756511</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>