Toy balloon tariff classification: functional heading prevails over residual rubber and festive article headings, supporting penalties for deliberate ...
Customs valuation using comparable contemporaneous imports can displace declared value, while missing speaking orders require pursuit before competent...
Foreign customs declarations and importer admissions established undervaluation, supporting sequential value redetermination, differential duty, and m...
Customs seizure safeguards prevent detention-based limitation avoidance and invalidate provisional release conditions for imported vehicles under an i...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
361 to 380 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Appellant was found guilty of contravening Sections 8(3) read with 8(4) and Sections 8(3) read with 8(4) read with Section 64 of FERA for over-invoicing imported books and unauthorised foreign exchange remittances through proprietorship firms. Although not the mastermind, Appellant had knowledge of the fraudulent scheme and allowed the main accused to use proprietorship names for imports. Based on recorded statements and available records, Appellate Tribunal established Appellant's involvement in the contravention. The penalty was reduced to Rs. 2 Lakhs, which was already pre-deposited. The blocked amount of Rs. 60,859.52 in Appellant's firm's account was directed to be released along with interest.
Appellant was found guilty of contravening Sections 8(3) read with 8(4) and Sections 8(3) read with 8(4) read with Section 64 of FERA for over-invoicing imported books and unauthorised foreign exchange remittances through proprietorship firms. Although not the mastermind, Appellant had knowledge of the fraudulent scheme and allowed the main accused to use proprietorship names for imports. Based on recorded statements and available records, Appellate Tribunal established Appellant's involvement in the contravention. The penalty was reduced to Rs. 2 Lakhs, which was already pre-deposited. The blocked amount of Rs. 60,859.52 in Appellant's firm's account was directed to be released along with interest.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
