https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338541 The Tribunal upheld the decision of the adjudicating Commissioner in accepting the company's explanation for amending the bill of lading to correct the consignee's name. It emphasized the importance of adhering strictly to the Customs Act, distinguishing between genuine mistakes and deliberate contraventions. The Tribunal ruled that errors in consignee names do not warrant confiscation under the Customs Act and dismissed the Revenue's appeal for failing to establish legal grounds to sustain the proceedings dropped by the Commissioner. en-us Wed, 14 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Feb 2018 12:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338541 The Tribunal upheld the decision of the adjudicating Commissioner in accepting the company's explanation for amending the bill of lading to correct the consignee's name. It emphasized the importance of adhering strictly to the Customs Act, distinguishing between genuine mistakes and deliberate contraventions. The Tribunal ruled that errors in consignee names do not warrant confiscation under the Customs Act and dismissed the Revenue's appeal for failing to establish legal grounds to sustain the proceedings dropped by the Commissioner. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 14 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338541