https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120586 The Tribunal upheld the jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Authority, ruling that the change from Commissioner of Customs (P) Bombay to Commissioner Air Cargo was valid. Penalties under sections 114(i) and 114(iii) of the Customs Act were upheld as the applicants' actions rendered goods liable to confiscation. Non-supply of relied upon documents was rejected as the invoices were provided earlier and not contested. Despite claims of financial hardship, the Tribunal directed significant pre-deposits from the applicants. Mis-declaration and unauthorized drawback claims were substantiated, with one individual granted waiver due to lack of evidence of conscious knowledge. Compliance was set for 4-4-2007. en-us Wed, 03 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Jul 2012 14:23:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120586 The Tribunal upheld the jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Authority, ruling that the change from Commissioner of Customs (P) Bombay to Commissioner Air Cargo was valid. Penalties under sections 114(i) and 114(iii) of the Customs Act were upheld as the applicants' actions rendered goods liable to confiscation. Non-supply of relied upon documents was rejected as the invoices were provided earlier and not contested. Despite claims of financial hardship, the Tribunal directed significant pre-deposits from the applicants. Mis-declaration and unauthorized drawback claims were substantiated, with one individual granted waiver due to lack of evidence of conscious knowledge. Compliance was set for 4-4-2007. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 03 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120586