<?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>1962 (7) TMI 1 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45722</link>
    <description>A quasi-judicial customs penalty proceeding based on retracted or disputed statements requires the authority to examine the objections, test the voluntariness and truth of the statements, and give reasons for rejecting them; a bare assertion that the matter was considered is insufficient, and the penalty order was treated as unsustainable on that ground. The text also states that departmental penalty proceedings and criminal prosecution on the same facts may proceed independently because they arise under different regimes. It further explains that a person may be concerned in importation where goods are actually imported or arranged for import, even if seizure occurs after crossing the customs frontier.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Jul 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Jul 2010 14:04:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=84249" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1962 (7) TMI 1 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45722</link>
      <description>A quasi-judicial customs penalty proceeding based on retracted or disputed statements requires the authority to examine the objections, test the voluntariness and truth of the statements, and give reasons for rejecting them; a bare assertion that the matter was considered is insufficient, and the penalty order was treated as unsustainable on that ground. The text also states that departmental penalty proceedings and criminal prosecution on the same facts may proceed independently because they arise under different regimes. It further explains that a person may be concerned in importation where goods are actually imported or arranged for import, even if seizure occurs after crossing the customs frontier.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Jul 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45722</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>