CUSTOMS APPEALS NOS.K-1489 AND K-743 OF 2001, DECIDED ON 8TH APRIL, 2002. versus CUSTOMS APPEALS NOS.K-1489 AND K-743 OF 2001, DECIDED ON 8TH APRIL, 2002.
The allegations of false declarations of Sections 32, 80 and 194 of the goods found that the misrepresentation of the departmental officials concerned had made a correct declaration in relation to the description, weight and price of the goods. And this is consistent with the documents presented in support of it: In such a situation that the importer's intention to mislead the authority would be to abrogate the law so that the usual work of an importer in relation to the infringement would be Come out Responsibilities were not required, as the worker had to perform his duties within the scope of the law. The Assisting Authority could send the goods to the appropriate professional authorities for evaluation and could evaluate the goods on the basis of their advice, in the event there was no false declaration by the importer. The issue of discrimination order and remand for the adjudicating officer for this decision is once again on merit.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
criminal advocate from Khanewal lawyer
