<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2002 (2) TMI 463 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101219</link>
    <description>Misdeclaration and over-invoicing in export documentation justify confiscation of the goods under Customs law, because a merchant exporter remains responsible for verifying the correctness of the goods before export. The goods were found not to conform to the declared description and value, so confiscation was sustained. The redemption fine was nevertheless moderated on the facts and circumstances and reduced to Rs. 75,000, while the penalty was upheld as justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:52:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138269" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (2) TMI 463 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101219</link>
      <description>Misdeclaration and over-invoicing in export documentation justify confiscation of the goods under Customs law, because a merchant exporter remains responsible for verifying the correctness of the goods before export. The goods were found not to conform to the declared description and value, so confiscation was sustained. The redemption fine was nevertheless moderated on the facts and circumstances and reduced to Rs. 75,000, while the penalty was upheld as justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101219</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>