<?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>2022 (2) TMI 1515 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT  </title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464208</link>
    <description>Penalty for defects in import declaration form/Form 38 could not be sustained where the omissions were only clerical, the discrepancy was explained at the seizure stage, and no finding was recorded that the assessee acted deliberately to evade tax. The Tribunal applied prior decisions and held that mere inadequacy in the forms, without proof of intent to evade, is insufficient to justify penalty. Penalty was therefore held unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2025 21:29:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=857693" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (2) TMI 1515 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT  </title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464208</link>
      <description>Penalty for defects in import declaration form/Form 38 could not be sustained where the omissions were only clerical, the discrepancy was explained at the seizure stage, and no finding was recorded that the assessee acted deliberately to evade tax. The Tribunal applied prior decisions and held that mere inadequacy in the forms, without proof of intent to evade, is insufficient to justify penalty. Penalty was therefore held unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT / Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464208</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>