<?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 (12) TMI 307 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS &amp; CENTRAL EXCISE, C</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106939</link>
    <description>The Settlement Commission granted immunities to the main applicant, M/s. Wipro GE Medical Systems Limited, under Section 127H of the Customs Act, 1962, including immunity from fine, penalty, and prosecution. The Commission noted the applicant&#039;s cooperation and full disclosure, ordering the return of the bank guarantee upon payment of balance interest. However, no immunity from interest was granted, and the applicant was directed to pay any additional amount if necessary. The immunities could be withdrawn if fraudulent means were employed, with the jurisdictional authority tasked to calculate and adjust the interest due. Compliance was required from the main applicant and co-applicants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2012 14:38:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=143959" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (12) TMI 307 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS &amp; CENTRAL EXCISE, C</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106939</link>
      <description>The Settlement Commission granted immunities to the main applicant, M/s. Wipro GE Medical Systems Limited, under Section 127H of the Customs Act, 1962, including immunity from fine, penalty, and prosecution. The Commission noted the applicant&#039;s cooperation and full disclosure, ordering the return of the bank guarantee upon payment of balance interest. However, no immunity from interest was granted, and the applicant was directed to pay any additional amount if necessary. The immunities could be withdrawn if fraudulent means were employed, with the jurisdictional authority tasked to calculate and adjust the interest due. Compliance was required from the main applicant and co-applicants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106939</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>