Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3301 to 3320 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
For assessment and recovery purposes, the importer is the person who files the Bill of Entry, subscribes to the statutory declaration and seeks clearance; because those acts were done by the filing firms and not the appellants, the duty demand under Section 28 and denial of Notification No. 80/95-Cus failed against them. Misdeclaration under Section 111(m) required responsibility for or knowing participation in the false declaration, and no such evidence existed against the appellants, so confiscation and redemption fine were set aside. However, their furnishing of advance licences, end-use bonds and bank guarantees amounted to deliberate facilitation of improper clearance, sustaining penalty under Section 112(a).
For assessment and recovery purposes, the importer is the person who files the Bill of Entry, subscribes to the statutory declaration and seeks clearance; because those acts were done by the filing firms and not the appellants, the duty demand under Section 28 and denial of Notification No. 80/95-Cus failed against them. Misdeclaration under Section 111(m) required responsibility for or knowing participation in the false declaration, and no such evidence existed against the appellants, so confiscation and redemption fine were set aside. However, their furnishing of advance licences, end-use bonds and bank guarantees amounted to deliberate facilitation of improper clearance, sustaining penalty under Section 112(a).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
