https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327098 The Court upheld the final order of the CCESC, which determined duty, reduced penalties, and granted immunity to the Respondent who had brought undeclared dutiable goods. The Court rejected the Customs Department's argument that the CCESC lacked jurisdiction due to the absence of a declaration of dutiable goods, citing precedents and emphasizing the broad interpretation of the CCESC's jurisdiction. The Court found the Respondent's actions an attempt to evade duty payment and refused to interfere with the CCESC's order, disposing of the writ petition accordingly. en-us Thu, 28 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Nov 2016 17:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327098 The Court upheld the final order of the CCESC, which determined duty, reduced penalties, and granted immunity to the Respondent who had brought undeclared dutiable goods. The Court rejected the Customs Department's argument that the CCESC lacked jurisdiction due to the absence of a declaration of dutiable goods, citing precedents and emphasizing the broad interpretation of the CCESC's jurisdiction. The Court found the Respondent's actions an attempt to evade duty payment and refused to interfere with the CCESC's order, disposing of the writ petition accordingly. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 28 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327098