<?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 (3) TMI 316 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS &amp; CENTRAL EXCISE, M</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101524</link>
    <description>The case involved misdeclaration of weight of imported goods by M/s. Jai Mata Di Impex. The applicant admitted the misdeclaration and agreed to pay the differential duty. The Settlement Commission rejected the Commissioner&#039;s investigation report and agreed with the original duty calculation. The applicant was granted immunity from fine, penalty, interest beyond what was already paid, and prosecution under the Customs Act and the Indian Penal Code. However, immunity from prosecution under other Central Acts was denied. The applicant was ordered to pay interest for an eight-day delay in payment of duty liability. The case was settled on payment of the calculated differential duty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:59:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138573" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (3) TMI 316 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS &amp; CENTRAL EXCISE, M</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101524</link>
      <description>The case involved misdeclaration of weight of imported goods by M/s. Jai Mata Di Impex. The applicant admitted the misdeclaration and agreed to pay the differential duty. The Settlement Commission rejected the Commissioner&#039;s investigation report and agreed with the original duty calculation. The applicant was granted immunity from fine, penalty, interest beyond what was already paid, and prosecution under the Customs Act and the Indian Penal Code. However, immunity from prosecution under other Central Acts was denied. The applicant was ordered to pay interest for an eight-day delay in payment of duty liability. The case was settled on payment of the calculated differential duty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101524</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>