<?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 (8) TMI 1487 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777299</link>
    <description>CESTAT KOLKATA - AT allowed the appeal and set aside penalties under Sections 114 and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. The tribunal found the appellant had duly verified KYC and supporting documents (Aadhaar, PAN, IT return, bank letter, GST certificate, authorization) and acted in bona fide belief as a customs broker; the appellant did not know consignment contents and mere introduction by a third party did not justify penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2025 08:32:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=846335" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (8) TMI 1487 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777299</link>
      <description>CESTAT KOLKATA - AT allowed the appeal and set aside penalties under Sections 114 and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. The tribunal found the appellant had duly verified KYC and supporting documents (Aadhaar, PAN, IT return, bank letter, GST certificate, authorization) and acted in bona fide belief as a customs broker; the appellant did not know consignment contents and mere introduction by a third party did not justify penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777299</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>