Customs valuation and import permissibility conflict resolved: accepted enhancement of transaction value removes liability for confiscation and penalt...
Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismi...
Second Schedule attachment and validity of a post-notice mortgage: TRO cannot declare mortgage void ab initio; sale and appropriation allowed thereaft...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6601 to 6620 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
DRI officers were held competent to issue SCNs in drawback fraud cases, applying the Tribunal's later precedent upholding DRI jurisdiction; consequently, the challenge to SCN validity failed. Deliberate post-LEO alteration of Bills of Lading to change the port of discharge was treated as fraudulent conduct affecting Customs risk assessment and therefore constituted misdeclaration in the Shipping Bills; accordingly, the export declarations were held tainted. A company was held to fall within "person" by applying the General Clauses Act where the Customs Act is silent; accordingly, corporate liability under s.114 was maintainable in law. However, absent proof of knowing abetment by the customs broker, penalty under s.114(i) was set aside, leaving any lapse to CHALR action. - CESTAT
DRI officers were held competent to issue SCNs in drawback fraud cases, applying the Tribunal's later precedent upholding DRI jurisdiction; consequently, the challenge to SCN validity failed. Deliberate post-LEO alteration of Bills of Lading to change the port of discharge was treated as fraudulent conduct affecting Customs risk assessment and therefore constituted misdeclaration in the Shipping Bills; accordingly, the export declarations were held tainted. A company was held to fall within "person" by applying the General Clauses Act where the Customs Act is silent; accordingly, corporate liability under s.114 was maintainable in law. However, absent proof of knowing abetment by the customs broker, penalty under s.114(i) was set aside, leaving any lapse to CHALR action. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.