<?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>2003 (4) TMI 128 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46866</link>
    <description>The SC declined to interfere with the Tribunal&#039;s order confirming penalty under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962, and upheld the dismissal of the appeals. It also refused to entertain the new argument that penalty could not be imposed on both the exporter and the supplier, because that contention had not been raised before the Tribunal. The Court treated the Section 114 objection as procedurally barred and maintained the Tribunal&#039;s conclusion.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2014 12:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=85386" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (4) TMI 128 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46866</link>
      <description>The SC declined to interfere with the Tribunal&#039;s order confirming penalty under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962, and upheld the dismissal of the appeals. It also refused to entertain the new argument that penalty could not be imposed on both the exporter and the supplier, because that contention had not been raised before the Tribunal. The Court treated the Section 114 objection as procedurally barred and maintained the Tribunal&#039;s conclusion.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46866</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>