https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411328 Mis-declaration in the bill of entry was attributed to the importer, who remained responsible for truthful and complete customs declarations even if the overseas supplier sent different goods. A demand under section 28(4) of the Customs Act could not be sustained for goods not yet cleared for home consumption, and the DRI-issued show cause notice was invalid where the officer was not the proper officer for section 28 purposes. Penalty on the Customs Broker under section 112(a) was not supportable absent material showing knowledge, participation, or liability to confiscation. Confiscation and importer penalties based on recorded statements required compliance with section 138B and natural justice; those matters were remanded for fresh adjudication. en-us Mon, 16 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Aug 2021 08:41:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411328 Mis-declaration in the bill of entry was attributed to the importer, who remained responsible for truthful and complete customs declarations even if the overseas supplier sent different goods. A demand under section 28(4) of the Customs Act could not be sustained for goods not yet cleared for home consumption, and the DRI-issued show cause notice was invalid where the officer was not the proper officer for section 28 purposes. Penalty on the Customs Broker under section 112(a) was not supportable absent material showing knowledge, participation, or liability to confiscation. Confiscation and importer penalties based on recorded statements required compliance with section 138B and natural justice; those matters were remanded for fresh adjudication. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 16 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411328