<?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 (10) TMI 606 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188989</link>
    <description>A declaration used to obtain customs clearance was held to be ineffective where it was made with knowledge that funds were unavailable and the cheque was backed by false records. The later realisation of the cheque did not cure the fraud or fix the date of payment for customs purposes. On that basis, the enhanced post-Budget rate of duty applied, and the warehousing clearance could not defeat the Revenue&#039;s claim. The Court held that deliberate misstatement, suppression of facts and fraudulent intent to evade duty were established, making the goods liable to confiscation and sustaining penalties against the importer, its officers and involved departmental officials.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Jun 2024 15:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=452605" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (10) TMI 606 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188989</link>
      <description>A declaration used to obtain customs clearance was held to be ineffective where it was made with knowledge that funds were unavailable and the cheque was backed by false records. The later realisation of the cheque did not cure the fraud or fix the date of payment for customs purposes. On that basis, the enhanced post-Budget rate of duty applied, and the warehousing clearance could not defeat the Revenue&#039;s claim. The Court held that deliberate misstatement, suppression of facts and fraudulent intent to evade duty were established, making the goods liable to confiscation and sustaining penalties against the importer, its officers and involved departmental officials.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188989</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>