https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252324 Fraudulent export claims supported by documentary recovery, expert reports and corroborated statements justified rejection of duty drawback where the declared goods were found misdescribed, overvalued, inferior or non-existent. Recovery of drawback already obtained was sustained against persons shown to control and operate the sham exporter, because the concern was held to be fictitious and the transactions were part of a coordinated fraud. Misdeclaration of description, quantity, weight and value also warranted confiscation of the export goods, and deliberate participation in the scheme supported penalty under section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal also permitted an additional legal ground to be raised in the ancillary application. en-us Wed, 15 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Oct 2014 18:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252324 Fraudulent export claims supported by documentary recovery, expert reports and corroborated statements justified rejection of duty drawback where the declared goods were found misdescribed, overvalued, inferior or non-existent. Recovery of drawback already obtained was sustained against persons shown to control and operate the sham exporter, because the concern was held to be fictitious and the transactions were part of a coordinated fraud. Misdeclaration of description, quantity, weight and value also warranted confiscation of the export goods, and deliberate participation in the scheme supported penalty under section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal also permitted an additional legal ground to be raised in the ancillary application. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 15 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252324