Problems
The Central Administration of Customs Investigation of the SAT, ordered the precautionary seizure of the merchandise submitted to the definitive import procedure, considering that our client “the taxpayer” declared within customs clearance a value lower than 86.08% of the value taken as a reference by said Customs Unit, thus determining updated the cause of precautionary seizure provided for in numeral 151 section VII of the Customs Law and allegedly committed the infraction contemplated by numeral 176 section I of the aforementioned Customs Ordinance; proceeding on the part of the Customs, with the Initiation of the Administrative Procedure in Customs Matters.
ACTIONS AND STRATEGIES IMPLEMENTED BY ASESORES STRATEGO
The evidence and allegations against the Administrative Procedure in Customs Matters initiated by the customs authority were prepared and presented, and the following was reliably verified:
That the value declared by “the taxpayer morale” corresponded to the value actually paid for the goods submitted to the import procedure, which was demonstrated in accordance with the guidelines provided for by the Customs Law and International Agreements; therefore, that was the value that should prevail for the Foreign Trade operation.
In this regard, the appropriate evidence was offered and exhibited within the Administrative Instance to disprove the assumption of precautionary seizure and infringement presumed by the customs authority.
RESULT
Based on the arguments and strategies implemented for the resolution of this case, a FAVORABLE final resolution was obtained in the Administrative Procedure in Customs Matters, in which the following was fundamentally resolved:
“… RESOLUTION POINTS
FIRST.- Consequently, the importer […], the Customs Broker […] is acquitted of the infraction provided for in Article 178, section I of the Customs Law, since with the evidence presented by both the importer and the Customs Agent, the cause of precautionary seizure provided for in Article 151, section VII of the Customs Law in force has been distorted.
SECOND.- With regard to the merchandise AFFECTED by the Administrative Procedure in Customs Matters number […] which was only in guarantee of the fiscal interest in accordance with article 151, penultimate paragraph of the Customs Law in force, is at the disposal of the Importer […] and the Customs Agent…”
Finally, it should be noted that as a result of the intervention of our team, in the present case it was possible to avoid through the corresponding legal means, a legal contingency for our client, which evidently at the time endangered his assets.
CASE STUDY SUPPORT
For more information or support of this success story as well as our services, we ask you to fill out the following form or contact 800 626 0155
Legal Notice and Copyright
The content of this article is for informational and general information purposes only. It does not constitute a legal opinion, personalized advice, or specific tax advice. Consequently, ST STRATEGO assumes no liability arising from the interpretation or use of this document.
Reproduction of this publication in whole or in part, by any means or format, is strictly prohibited without prior, express, and written authorization from the author. Any unauthorized use will be punished in accordance with the Federal Copyright Law and other applicable provisions.
If you would like more information on the information presented here or to learn more about our legal, tax, and foreign trade solutions, please do not hesitate to contact us at info@stratego-st.com.