|
- Direct Tax Laws
- Income Tax
- Wealth Tax
- Other Direct Taxes
- Banking Cash Transaction Tax - BCTT
- Banking Cash Transaction Tax - Rules 2005
- Securities Transaction Tax - STT
- Securities Transaction Tax - Rules 2004
- Commodities Transaction Tax - CTT
- Expenditure-tax Act, 1987
- Expenditure-tax Rules, 1987
- Interest-tax Act, 1974
- Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988
- Other Rules, Regulations & Schemes
- Indirect Tax laws
- Service Tax
- Central Excise
- Import / Export
- Customs
- Customs Case Laws
- Statute - Acts and Rules
- Notifications and Circulars
- Exemption / Tariff Notifications
- Effective Exemption / Tariff Notifications - All
- Category wise Effective Exemption / Tariff Notifications
- Customs - Anti Dumping Duty Notifications
- Customs - Safeguard Duty Notifications
- Non Tariff (NT) Notifications
- Non Tariff (NT) Effective Notifications
- Customs - Circulars
- Rates and Classification
- Customs Board's Manual
- e-book - Spl. Duties
- Customs - Forms
- Foreign Trade Policy (FTP)
- Special Economic Zone (SEZ)
- RBI / FEMA
- Foreign Exchange Management (FEMA)
- VAT / Sales Tax
- Delhi Value Added Tax (DVAT)
- Central Sales Tax (CST)
- Corporate Laws
- Companies Law
- Limitted Liability Partnership (LLP)
- Partnership Firms
- Trust and Societies
- Finance Acts and Bills
- Finance Acts and Bills
- Miscellaneous Provisions
- Various other statutory Laws
| Case Laws |
|
Customs |
Records 1 to 20 of 12996 |
|---|
TMI - 209643 - MADRAS HIGH COURT M/s SREE RAJENDRA TEXTILES, BANGALORE Versus THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS Whether continued detention of goods can be justified - petitioner imported Silk Fabric in November, 2010 goods held under the custody of the Department since then - interim directions issued for provisional release of goods subject to furnishing o...... |
|
TMI - 209642 - CESTAT, Bangalore M/s. SAP India Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Commissioner of Customs Bangalore. Refund - recovery of duty twice from the appellant and from the customers of the appellant - the appellants filed a refund claim for refund of Rs.5,21,98,021/- paid by them. The DRI has on a query stated that the impugned amount was deposited volunta...... |
|
TMI - 209641 - CESTAT, DELHI M/s.Automotive Tyre Importers Association & Others DA/MOF Imposition of anti-dumping duty on tyres, tubes and tyre-flaps - appellant states that his share of imports compared to total consumption is insignificant and cannot be a cause of injury to the domestic industry, many of the economic indicators taken...... |
|
TMI - 209623 - KERALA HIGH COURT HARI PRIYA TRADERS Versus THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS -...... |
|
TMI - 209622 - KERALA HIGH COURT MOHAMMED FARIZ AND CO Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS -...... |
|
TMI - 209621 - KERALA HIGH COURT HARI PRIYA TRADERS Versus THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS -...... |
|
TMI - 209620 - KERALA HIGH COURT M/S.GLOBAL INDUSTRIES Versus THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS -...... |
|
TMI - 209579 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT D.K. ENTERPRISES Versus PIMPRI CHINCHWAD MUNICIPAL COUNCIL Octroi payment - Who should bear the liabilty on the goods auctioned - If the Warehouse fails to give delivery of the goods or such goods are not exported with the specified period, Warehousing Corporation is liable to pay octroi at the prevailing ra...... |
|
TMI - 209577 - CESTAT, BANGALORE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, HYDERABAD Versus HASTEN STORES Penalty - prohibited goods - goods imported without IEC Number - confiscation under Section 111 sub-clause (d) of the Customs Act, 1962 - Held that:- importation without IEC ipso facto does not make the goods prohibited, respondent did not produce a ...... |
|
TMI - 209576 - CESTAT, BANGALORE ACALMAR OILS & FATS LTD. Versus COMMR. OF CUSTOMS, VISAKHAPATNAM Unjust enrichment - refund - appellant had filed bills of entries on 31-1-2006, which were provisionally assessed on the value of USD 415 PMT of the imported goods. On the very same day, vide Notification No. 7/2005-Cus., (N.T.) dated. 31-1-2006, the...... |
|
TMI - 209575 - CESTAT, BANGALORE ABB LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, BANGALORE Demand - Misdeclaration - Notification No. 13/2002-C.E. (N.T.), dated 1-3-2002 and amended by Notification No. 2/2006-C.E. (N.T.), dated 1-3-2006 - The impugned goods were basically electrical apparatus and were neither sold by weight or by measure -...... |
|
TMI - 209574 - CESTAT, CHENNAI COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CHENNAI Versus THERMO KING INDIA PVT. LTD. Amendment of documents - Refund claim was rejected on the ground that the assessees have not challenged the assessment. The Commissioner (Appeals) accepted the contention of the assessees that the case falls under ambit of Section 149 of the Customs ...... |
|
TMI - 209572 - CESTAT, BANGALORE ITC LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, VISAKHAPATNAM -...... |
|
TMI - 209571 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ATLANTIC SHIPPING PVT. LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA -...... |
|
TMI - 209568 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA IN RE : STAR WIRE (INDIA) LTD. Revision application - drawback claim under Section 74 of Customs Act - Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Drawback) rejected claim - Government notes that the description of the goods as given in all the import tallies with the description given in ...... |
|
TMI - 209566 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA IN RE : SAINI DARSHAN SINGH KARTAR SINGH Revision Application - seizure of foreign currency - applicant deposited the personal penalty and requested to release the foreign currency after deducting the redemption fine - release of foreign currency was denied treating the application as time ...... |
|
TMI - 209565 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA -...... |
|
TMI - 209564 - MADRAS HIGH COURT BOND STORES PVT. LTD. Versus CUS. & C. EX. SETTLEMENT COMMISSION -...... |
|
TMI - 209559 - CESTAT, BANGALORE VERIFONE INDIA PVT. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, BANGALORE Duty demand - Import - inadmissible exemption availed by the appellant - goods assessed to duty at the time of import in terms of Notification No. 13/81-Cus., dated 9-2-1981 and 123/81-C.E., dated 2-6-1981 on the strength of appropriate certificate o...... |
|
TMI - 209556 - CESTAT, MUMBAI RUCHI ACRONI INDUSTRIES LTD. Versus COMMR. OF CUS. (IMPORT), MUMBAI Refund claim - assessee cleared the goods on payment of VAT and filed a refund claim in terms of Notification No. 102/07-Cus, the refund claim was rejected on the ground that the appellants has not made endorsement on the invoices as per condition 2(...... |
|
 
 Site Search
News
Recent updates
Artciles
Communication
Currently 1073 users are online |