https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286628 For confiscation under Section 113(i) of the Customs Act, 1962, goods must satisfy the statutory definition of "dutiable goods", meaning they are chargeable to duty and duty has not been paid; the Court refused to read the conjunctive wording as disjunctive and held the provision was not attracted on the facts. An alleged misdeclaration of F.O.B. value was not a "material particular" because materiality under the Act is confined to customs duty and control of prohibited goods, not matters relevant only to foreign exchange regulation. As no duty evasion was shown, Section 114(ii) could not be invoked, and the show cause notice was quashed. en-us Thu, 11 Feb 1971 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Mar 2020 10:55:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286628 For confiscation under Section 113(i) of the Customs Act, 1962, goods must satisfy the statutory definition of "dutiable goods", meaning they are chargeable to duty and duty has not been paid; the Court refused to read the conjunctive wording as disjunctive and held the provision was not attracted on the facts. An alleged misdeclaration of F.O.B. value was not a "material particular" because materiality under the Act is confined to customs duty and control of prohibited goods, not matters relevant only to foreign exchange regulation. As no duty evasion was shown, Section 114(ii) could not be invoked, and the show cause notice was quashed. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 11 Feb 1971 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286628