<?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>Penalty upheld under Section 112(a) for fake pre-shipment certificate in metal scrap import case, reduced to Rs. 1 lakh</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90574</link>
    <description>The CESTAT upheld the levy of penalty under section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962, against the appellant as the High Sea Seller for procuring a fabricated pre-shipment inspection certificate (PSIC) related to the import of metal scrap from Mauritius. The tribunal emphasized the gravity of issuing a defective certificate, given the potential presence of hazardous materials, which poses serious risks to public safety. The appellant&#039;s contention regarding valuation was rejected since valuation pertains to the importer&#039;s liability, and the importer&#039;s appeal on valuation had already been allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The penalty was reduced to Rs. 1 lakh, and the appeal was otherwise dismissed, affirming the imposition of penalty for the procedural violation involving the defective PSIC.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2025 14:25:11 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2025 14:25:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=836760" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Penalty upheld under Section 112(a) for fake pre-shipment certificate in metal scrap import case, reduced to Rs. 1 lakh</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90574</link>
      <description>The CESTAT upheld the levy of penalty under section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962, against the appellant as the High Sea Seller for procuring a fabricated pre-shipment inspection certificate (PSIC) related to the import of metal scrap from Mauritius. The tribunal emphasized the gravity of issuing a defective certificate, given the potential presence of hazardous materials, which poses serious risks to public safety. The appellant&#039;s contention regarding valuation was rejected since valuation pertains to the importer&#039;s liability, and the importer&#039;s appeal on valuation had already been allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The penalty was reduced to Rs. 1 lakh, and the appeal was otherwise dismissed, affirming the imposition of penalty for the procedural violation involving the defective PSIC.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2025 14:25:11 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90574</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>