https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118684 The tribunal found that the exporter was not liable for penalty due to alleged misdeclaration and ineligible DEEC licenses as the licenses were not canceled by authorities. Importers' duty liability under transferred DEEC licenses was uncertain, leading to a waiver of further deposits. Penalties imposed on various parties were upheld, except for one citing financial hardship. The tribunal considered waiver of pre-deposit requirements under Section 129E of the Customs Act, suggesting a 50% deposit for some cases. Majority opinion ruled no further pre-deposit was needed, ordering a stay of recovery pending appeals, scheduled for 9-9-2004. en-us Fri, 23 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Jul 2012 10:46:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118684 The tribunal found that the exporter was not liable for penalty due to alleged misdeclaration and ineligible DEEC licenses as the licenses were not canceled by authorities. Importers' duty liability under transferred DEEC licenses was uncertain, leading to a waiver of further deposits. Penalties imposed on various parties were upheld, except for one citing financial hardship. The tribunal considered waiver of pre-deposit requirements under Section 129E of the Customs Act, suggesting a 50% deposit for some cases. Majority opinion ruled no further pre-deposit was needed, ordering a stay of recovery pending appeals, scheduled for 9-9-2004. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 23 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118684