Mis-declaration and Concealment: confiscation affirmed, transaction value re-determined and mandatory penalty sustained; redemption allowed on payment...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5561 to 5580 of 96208 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Customs law did not extend to fasten liability on a foreign exporter for pre-amendment transactions where the exporter was outside India and the relevant amendment to Section 1 operated only prospectively from 29 March 2018. The Act placed post-import compliance and responsibility on the Indian importer, and no legal basis was shown to make the foreign exporter answer for the importers' alleged misdeclaration. Penalties under Sections 112 and 114AA also failed because there was no evidence of any act, omission, abetment, false declaration, or other conduct by the petitioners that satisfied the statutory requirements. On that basis, the show-cause notices were quashed as without jurisdiction.
Customs law did not extend to fasten liability on a foreign exporter for pre-amendment transactions where the exporter was outside India and the relevant amendment to Section 1 operated only prospectively from 29 March 2018. The Act placed post-import compliance and responsibility on the Indian importer, and no legal basis was shown to make the foreign exporter answer for the importers' alleged misdeclaration. Penalties under Sections 112 and 114AA also failed because there was no evidence of any act, omission, abetment, false declaration, or other conduct by the petitioners that satisfied the statutory requirements. On that basis, the show-cause notices were quashed as without jurisdiction.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.