<?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>2025 (3) TMI 1258 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767872</link>
    <description>CESTAT Kolkata upheld confiscation of 1194 gold bangles weighing 54096 gms valued at Rs.16,10,43,792/- under Section 113(k) of Customs Act, 1962 for diversion of export consignment. Court found exporters negligent in failing to load goods for export despite completing formalities. Redemption fine reduced to Rs.15,00,000/- considering limited value addition. Penalties under Section 114(iii) imposed but Section 114AA penalty rejected as documents weren&#039;t falsified. COFEPOSA proceedings against main accused were dropped. Court criticized investigation lapses including missing CCTV footage and reliance on retracted statements without proper cross-examination procedures.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2025 13:08:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=809546" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 1258 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767872</link>
      <description>CESTAT Kolkata upheld confiscation of 1194 gold bangles weighing 54096 gms valued at Rs.16,10,43,792/- under Section 113(k) of Customs Act, 1962 for diversion of export consignment. Court found exporters negligent in failing to load goods for export despite completing formalities. Redemption fine reduced to Rs.15,00,000/- considering limited value addition. Penalties under Section 114(iii) imposed but Section 114AA penalty rejected as documents weren&#039;t falsified. COFEPOSA proceedings against main accused were dropped. Court criticized investigation lapses including missing CCTV footage and reliance on retracted statements without proper cross-examination procedures.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767872</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>