<?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 (12) TMI 644 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE,</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121992</link>
    <description>The court settled the differential duty at Rs. 6,48,59,259/- in a case involving under-valuation of imported Data Communications Equipment (DCE) and non-declaration of duty on hand-carried goods by employees. The main applicant company admitted under-valuation, revised the declared value, and proposed abatement for embedded software, which was not accepted. The court granted partial immunity from interest, penalties, fines, and prosecution under the Customs Act, 1962, while imposing a penalty and requiring the payment of the balance duty in installments. No immunity was granted under other Acts due to lack of specific references.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Aug 2012 17:42:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=158983" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (12) TMI 644 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE,</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121992</link>
      <description>The court settled the differential duty at Rs. 6,48,59,259/- in a case involving under-valuation of imported Data Communications Equipment (DCE) and non-declaration of duty on hand-carried goods by employees. The main applicant company admitted under-valuation, revised the declared value, and proposed abatement for embedded software, which was not accepted. The court granted partial immunity from interest, penalties, fines, and prosecution under the Customs Act, 1962, while imposing a penalty and requiring the payment of the balance duty in installments. No immunity was granted under other Acts due to lack of specific references.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121992</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>