Find a Lawyer

CUSTOMS APPEAL NO. K-198 OF 2004, DECIDED ON 30TH AUGUST, 2004. versus CUSTOMS APPEAL NO. K-198 OF 2004, DECIDED ON 30TH AUGUST, 2004.

Under section 32, 80, 207 and 194 of the Customs Act 1969, Customs Clearing Agent Appellate Tribunal accused of making Appellant's Appeal relating to the Customs Act, was issued a show cause notice under which it was imposed on the Importer with the sole discretion and intention. The accompanying allegation was made that the admission bill was first filed by the appellant under the diagnostic system to deceive the government through misinterpretation and the goods were assessed after scrutiny by the appropriate officer. And at that point another branch of the Customs House ray inspected the equipment and found out They were short of equipment. And on demand the allegedly short assessment duty was paid by the importer and he, too, served on the appellant of the cause notice for corruption after the release of the goods, even though the approval entry was assessed prior to the assessment. Was done under the system, there was no misrepresentation. Issuance of showcase notices for C to attract misdemeanors of Section 32 of the Importer Customs Act, 1969, was a wrong move in the circumstances because under the framework of Section 32 of the Customs Act, 1969, the importer or appellant's agent The source was never given a false statement, even if there was a mischief, it was a guessing officer who should have been. The error was found to be wrong, and the agent and the importer cannot be held responsible patent advocate from Bhuawana lawyer