<?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>2007 (9) TMI 166 -  SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS AND EX.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3274</link>
    <description>The applicant, Shri Vinod Kumar Garg, filed a settlement application under the Customs Act, 1944, in response to a Show Cause Notice charging him with duty. The Bench held that the applicant&#039;s acceptance of the duty liability and full payment fulfilled disclosure requirements. The application was admitted despite other noticees not approaching the Settlement Commission. The Bench acquired exclusive jurisdiction upon admission, allowing the case to proceed under Section 127C(1) of the Act. The applicant&#039;s eligibility was affirmed, emphasizing that it was not contingent on the actions of other noticees.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=42626" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (9) TMI 166 -  SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS AND EX.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3274</link>
      <description>The applicant, Shri Vinod Kumar Garg, filed a settlement application under the Customs Act, 1944, in response to a Show Cause Notice charging him with duty. The Bench held that the applicant&#039;s acceptance of the duty liability and full payment fulfilled disclosure requirements. The application was admitted despite other noticees not approaching the Settlement Commission. The Bench acquired exclusive jurisdiction upon admission, allowing the case to proceed under Section 127C(1) of the Act. The applicant&#039;s eligibility was affirmed, emphasizing that it was not contingent on the actions of other noticees.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3274</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>