<?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>2004 (3) TMI 573 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112064</link>
    <description>An export declaration showing an unrealistically inflated FOB value and an incorrectly stated quantity was treated as false where the exporter could not prove the declared value&#039;s correctness. On those facts, the export consignment became liable to confiscation under customs law, and penalty was upheld for the incorrect declaration. The article notes that the declared export particulars were not truthful and that the Commissioner&#039;s order was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2012 14:45:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=149080" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (3) TMI 573 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112064</link>
      <description>An export declaration showing an unrealistically inflated FOB value and an incorrectly stated quantity was treated as false where the exporter could not prove the declared value&#039;s correctness. On those facts, the export consignment became liable to confiscation under customs law, and penalty was upheld for the incorrect declaration. The article notes that the declared export particulars were not truthful and that the Commissioner&#039;s order was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112064</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>