<?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 Tribunal Holds Custodian Liable for Missing Refrigerant Gas Cylinders u/s 45, Upholds Penalty and Duty.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85262</link>
    <description>CESTAT affirmed customs duty liability and penalty against custodian for pilfered imported refrigerant gas cylinders while in custody. Following precedent from Delhi HC, tribunal held custodian responsible u/s 45 of Customs Act read with Regulation 6 of Handling of Cargo Regulations for safe custody until clearance. Show cause notice issued on 18.12.2013 was within limitation period from discovery of pilferage on 27.06.2013. Penalty u/s 117 upheld as custodian failed safekeeping obligations. Appellant&#039;s duty liability confirmed since goods requiring NOC from Chief Controller of Explosives were documented present during first check but subsequently found missing from sealed container.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jan 2025 09:00:44 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Jan 2025 09:00:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=792965" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Customs Tribunal Holds Custodian Liable for Missing Refrigerant Gas Cylinders u/s 45, Upholds Penalty and Duty.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85262</link>
      <description>CESTAT affirmed customs duty liability and penalty against custodian for pilfered imported refrigerant gas cylinders while in custody. Following precedent from Delhi HC, tribunal held custodian responsible u/s 45 of Customs Act read with Regulation 6 of Handling of Cargo Regulations for safe custody until clearance. Show cause notice issued on 18.12.2013 was within limitation period from discovery of pilferage on 27.06.2013. Penalty u/s 117 upheld as custodian failed safekeeping obligations. Appellant&#039;s duty liability confirmed since goods requiring NOC from Chief Controller of Explosives were documented present during first check but subsequently found missing from sealed container.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jan 2025 09:00:44 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85262</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>