Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
The case involves mis-declaration of imported goods to evade customs duties. The appellant declared goods as 100% Cotton fabrics to misuse duty exemption under DFRC licenses, while actually importing 65% poly and 35% Cotton fabrics. The fabrication of documents was admitted, leading to evasion of customs duties. The invocation of extended period was deemed justified. However, the Show Cause Notice issued was held time-barred as it exceeded the 5-year limit u/s 28(4) of the Customs Act, 1962. CESTAT held in a previous case that such notices beyond 5 years are invalid. Therefore, the appeal was allowed, and the Commissioner's order was set aside.
The case involves mis-declaration of imported goods to evade customs duties. The appellant declared goods as 100% Cotton fabrics to misuse duty exemption under DFRC licenses, while actually importing 65% poly and 35% Cotton fabrics. The fabrication of documents was admitted, leading to evasion of customs duties. The invocation of extended period was deemed justified. However, the Show Cause Notice issued was held time-barred as it exceeded the 5-year limit u/s 28(4) of the Customs Act, 1962. CESTAT held in a previous case that such notices beyond 5 years are invalid. Therefore, the appeal was allowed, and the Commissioner's order was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
