9911796707
Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be fully migrated on 31-July-2025 at 23:59:59
After this date, all services will be available exclusively on our new platform.
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please let us know
via our feedback form
, with specific details, so we can address them promptly.
Follow us:
|
Home
Issues:
1. Miscellaneous application for additional documents. 2. Confiscation of imported motor vehicle under Customs Act, 1962. Analysis: 1. The appellant filed a miscellaneous application seeking to submit additional documents, including an application to DGFT and related correspondence. The Tribunal found that reliance on a decision of the Tribunal did not require a separate application. However, the Tribunal allowed the submission of the additional documents, including the final order passed by the Tribunal in appeal No. C/484/08-SM. The miscellaneous application was allowed to that extent. 2. The main issue in the appeal was whether the motor vehicle imported by the appellant was liable to confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962, and whether the appellant was liable for penalty under Section 112(a) of the Act. The vehicle, a new car imported from the United Kingdom, lacked the required Type Approval Certificate from the country of origin as per Import Licensing Notes. The Commissioner ordered confiscation based on this non-compliance. 3. The appellant had sought relaxation of conditions from the DGFT, which was granted. The Foreign Trade Development Officer confirmed the exemption from the requirement of the Type Approval Certificate from the country of origin and accepted the certificate issued by an accredited agency outside the country of manufacture. As a result, the import of the vehicle was deemed compliant, and the confiscation order was set aside. 4. The Tribunal concluded that since the appellant was exempted from providing the Type Approval Certificate from the country of origin and the certificate produced was accepted, the import of the vehicle did not breach any restrictions or prohibitions. Therefore, the vehicle was not liable for confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962, and the appellant was not subject to penalty under Section 112(a) of the Act. Consequently, the Commissioner's order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
|
