<?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>Under-declared imported goods to cut IEC-holder commission: joint/several customs duty and 112(a)/114AA penalties set aside, remanded.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95234</link>
    <description>The dominant issue was whether customs duty and consequential penalties under sections 112(a) and 114AA of the Customs Act could be sustained when the Order-in-Original fastened liability on multiple separate legal entities on a &quot;jointly and/or severally&quot; basis, allegedly arising from under-declaration of goods to reduce commission payable to IEC holders or their employees. Relying on prior decisions that duty demands cannot be confirmed on a joint/several basis against different persons, the order was set aside and the matter remanded for a fresh factual determination of the actual importer/beneficial owner against whom duty, if any, could be demanded. - CESTAT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 20 Dec 2025 07:45:34 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Dec 2025 07:45:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=873002" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Under-declared imported goods to cut IEC-holder commission: joint/several customs duty and 112(a)/114AA penalties set aside, remanded.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95234</link>
      <description>The dominant issue was whether customs duty and consequential penalties under sections 112(a) and 114AA of the Customs Act could be sustained when the Order-in-Original fastened liability on multiple separate legal entities on a &quot;jointly and/or severally&quot; basis, allegedly arising from under-declaration of goods to reduce commission payable to IEC holders or their employees. Relying on prior decisions that duty demands cannot be confirmed on a joint/several basis against different persons, the order was set aside and the matter remanded for a fresh factual determination of the actual importer/beneficial owner against whom duty, if any, could be demanded. - CESTAT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 20 Dec 2025 07:45:34 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95234</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>