APPEAL NO. K-1899 OF 2001, DECIDED ON 24TH JANUARY, 2002. versus APPEAL NO. K-1899 OF 2001, DECIDED ON 24TH JANUARY, 2002.
Sections 32, 156 (1) (14) (86) and 180 show invalid show showcase notice Not to mention any specific act by the agent in relation to filing false statement The Assessing Officer made any special charge against the agent in the showcase notice. Did not The agent was that instead of providing him with specific evidence and the basis for the charge, the authority declared him guilty of an offense under section 32 of section 156 (1) (14) (86) of the Customs Act 1969. Gave. Such rules of the Assessing Officer violated the principles themselves, the imposition of Section 32 of the Natural Justice and Customs Act, 1969, was incorrect and the practice of unnecessarily defaming the agent and issuing show cause notices. Was the process of An act of misuse of power by the Adjustment Officer under section 180 of the Customs Act, 1969, to issue a show cause notice before imposition of a fine, under the provisions of s 180 of the Customs Act 1969, among other things, Confirmed that the victim's wall should be notified in writing on the basis of which he proposed to impose fines. In the present case, notice of cause was not disclosed or no cause was disclosed against the agent. Which resolved only the customs complaints. The rituals against which the Importer Grounds were proposed have never been disclosed. Thus, the initiation of action against the agent is a violation of the provisions of Section 180 of the Customs Act, 1969, under which the authorities imposed fines against the agent.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
