<?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>Proof of import through Bills of Entry failed on inadequate high sea sale evidence, sustaining remittance contravention</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98547</link>
    <description>Foreign remittance compliance turned on whether the appellant could prove import through valid Bills of Entry linked to the impugned remittances and asserted high sea sale documents. The Tribunal found that the Bill of Entry related to the same Bill of Lading, but the handwritten notation relied on to show coverage of all three remittances was partly illegible and not shown to have been made by authorised personnel. Customs records did not establish duty on the full amount claimed, and RBI confirmed that the relevant Bills of Entry had not been submitted to the Authorised Dealer. Contravention was therefore sustained, but the penalty was reduced and the pre-deposit adjusted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2026 08:56:59 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2026 08:56:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=895567" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Proof of import through Bills of Entry failed on inadequate high sea sale evidence, sustaining remittance contravention</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98547</link>
      <description>Foreign remittance compliance turned on whether the appellant could prove import through valid Bills of Entry linked to the impugned remittances and asserted high sea sale documents. The Tribunal found that the Bill of Entry related to the same Bill of Lading, but the handwritten notation relied on to show coverage of all three remittances was partly illegible and not shown to have been made by authorised personnel. Customs records did not establish duty on the full amount claimed, and RBI confirmed that the relevant Bills of Entry had not been submitted to the Authorised Dealer. Contravention was therefore sustained, but the penalty was reduced and the pre-deposit adjusted.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2026 08:56:59 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98547</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>