<?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 (7) TMI 553 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE,</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114356</link>
    <description>The case involved a company misusing the Advance Licence Scheme by misdeclaring and diverting goods for profit. The company exported inferior substitute material as Garlic Powder, leading to the seizure of goods due to discrepancies and inferior quality confirmed by samples. The company obtained an Advance Licence for duty-free import of garlic but diverted goods for profit in the domestic market. Following investigations and a show cause notice, the company applied for settlement before the Settlement Commission, which allowed the application for imports through Mumbai Port but advised on jurisdictional limitations for imports through Chennai Port.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 18:51:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151355" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (7) TMI 553 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE,</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114356</link>
      <description>The case involved a company misusing the Advance Licence Scheme by misdeclaring and diverting goods for profit. The company exported inferior substitute material as Garlic Powder, leading to the seizure of goods due to discrepancies and inferior quality confirmed by samples. The company obtained an Advance Licence for duty-free import of garlic but diverted goods for profit in the domestic market. Following investigations and a show cause notice, the company applied for settlement before the Settlement Commission, which allowed the application for imports through Mumbai Port but advised on jurisdictional limitations for imports through Chennai Port.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114356</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>