Advanced Search Options
Customs - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 33376 Records
More information of case laws are visible to the Subscriber of a package i.e:-
Party Name, Court Name, Date of Decision, Full Text of Headnote & Decision etc.
- 2020 (11) TMI 729 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Deadlocks/inordinate delays for clearance of import cargo. due to COVID-19 pandemic lockdown - the Learned Single Judge ordered that the payment of container detention charges or other penal charges by the petitioners for release of the cargo covered by Bills of Lading shall be provisional and subject to further orders in the writ petitions. - HELD THAT:- True, at the time of considering the interim relief, the Court is bound to consider whether, (1) there is prima facie case, (2) balance of convenience, and (3) likelihood of irreparable hardship. Writ court though not specifically adverted to the above, reading of the impugned order reflects the same. On the aspect of violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, that the earlier interim order in W.P. (C) No. 10177/2020, dated 25-5-2020 has not been followed, it could be deduced ....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 728 - COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (APPEALS), CHENNAI
Absolute Confiscation - quantum of penalty - import of Adult Toy - prohibited goods or not - Obscene Item or not - HELD THAT:- The appraiser/AA has to give his justification how he has to come to conclusion that it was an adult toy. As per Notification No. 1/1964-Cus. only an article with respect to any obscenity is restricted. The imported item massager cannot be connected with any obscenity. As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of AJAY GOSWAMI VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [2006 (12) TMI 500 - SUPREME COURT] the definition of obscenity differs from culture to culture, between communities within a single culture and also individuals within those communities. Moreover, this is imported for personal use and a single piece. Without any evidence the impugned order has been passed. Therefore, the contention of the departm....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 691 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
EPCG Scheme - non-issuance of Occupation Certificate - Construction of a multistoried building for operating a hotel - the cost included the cost of imported goods against which customs duty was not paid, as the goods imported were against 50 EPCG licenses - HELD THAT:- Since an application is pending, I am not going into the merits of the case. The EPCG committee is requested to consider the application filed by the petitioner on 9th August, 2020 within four weeks from today. The committee is also requested to pass a reasoned order after giving opportunity of hearing, not only to the petitioner but also to the customs authority, if required. As the petitioner has already alienated with the goods, imported without payment of customs duty, the customs authority may proceed to encash the bank guarantee for realising the customs duty but suc....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 690 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Direction to the respondent to finalise the bills of entry filed by the petitioner for clearance of goods - polyester knitted fabrics - period 2013 to 2016 - HELD THAT:- Keeping in view the limited prayer made in the writ petition, the same is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to finalise the bills of entry filed by the petitioner for clearance of goods namely polyester knitted fabrics during the period 2013 to 2016 within a period of six weeks - Petition disposed off.
- 2020 (11) TMI 689 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Reclaim of goods after surrender of rights in warehoused Goods (after import) u/s 23(3) - Due to increased customs duty, the plaintiffs could not take the delivery of the goods - Decree of mandatory injunction directing the defendants to deliver 58 bales, 76 bales and 61 bales respectively of the goods amenable to customs duty - defendants took the plea that the plaintiffs themselves have surrendered the goods in terms of Section 23(3) of the Customs Act vide letter dated 10-12-1985 and therefore, no cause for the plaintiffs to file the suit was made out - Section 23 of Customs Act - HELD THAT:- Learned Counsel for the respondents could not show any such document or evidence that they have availed of the remedy provided under the Customs Act. The Customs Act which being a special Act has provided remedial action against the orders of the ....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 688 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Maintainability of appeal - non-deposit of pre-deposit amount - Principles of Natural Justice - grounds urged in the appeal is that the third respondent ought to have extended an opportunity to the petitioner to cross-examine the officers who allegedly conducted search and seizure proceedings - HELD THAT:- In the present case, the appeal is dismissed on the ground that the petitioner did not deposit 50% of the demand in terms of the order dated 2-2-2016. It must also be mentioned that the directors of the petitioner’s company also did not deposit 50% of the penalty imposed on them, and further it must also be mentioned that there is no dispute that none appeared for the petitioner on 18-10-2016 when the appeal was listed for orders on an application filed for recall of the order dated 2-2-2016. The CESTAT’s order is not an ord....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 687 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Smuggling - gold chain - gold bangles - gold anklet - Reopening of adjudication proceedings - section 124 of Customs Act - HELD THAT:- There is no force and merit in the submission of the Learned Counsel for the petitioner. The reference to Section 124 of the Customs Act in not issuing any notice in writing for confiscation or imposition of the penalty cannot be agitated after the lapse of three years. Alleged non-adherence to the provisions of Section 124 by issuing a separate notice before imposition of penalty and confiscation, cannot be raised for the first time in the writ petition, that too after a gap of three years. However, on going through the adjudication order of Ext. P3, the petitioner suffered a statement which was not found to be sufficient and was served with Ext. P2 summons to appear and explain along with the documents r....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 686 - CESTAT MUMBAI
Implementation of order passed by this Tribunal and for early hearing of the said application - restoration of CHA license not stayed - HELD THAT:- In view of the fact that operation of the order dated 21.11.2019 has not been stayed or vacated by the higher appellate forum, the Revenue has left with no alternative, but to implement the order of the Tribunal in true letter and spirit. However, since it is contended that the order dated 21.11.2019 has already been appealed against by Revenue, we direct that the Revenue should obtained the stay order from the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in staying operation of the order dated 21.11.2019, if any, or to implement the said order passed by the Tribunal on expiry of the period of one month. Registry is directed to list the matter for reporting compliance on 16.11.2020.
- 2020 (11) TMI 685 - CESTAT CHENNAI
Classification of goods - consignment imported under SKD condition - Exemption for the purpose of assessment for countervailing duty - Import of components for manufacturing colour Doppler SSD-4000 Ultra Sound Scanners - HELD THAT:- When the goods are presented in SKD condition, Revenue does not have authority of law to separate different parts and components and classify them differently in view of Rule 2(a) of General Rules for Interpretation of the Customs Tariff. If Revenue wants to remove certain parts from the SKD package and classify differently, then Revenue has to establish that remaining parts, if assembled together have essential character of final product. Revenue has not brought forward any such evidence. Further, CBIC issued clarification which is reproduced in foregoing paragraph. The said clarification relies on Chapter No....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 637 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Gross overvaluation to fraudulently avail export benefits - Petitioner placed in the Denied Entity List (DEL) - Availment of fraudulent Special MEIS benefits - misdeclaration and forgery of documents - HELD THAT:- Any refusal to grant, suspend or cancel any licence, certificate, scrip or any instrument bestowing financial or fiscal benefits, can only be “by an order in writing”. In fact, Section 9(4) expressly mandates that suspension or cancellation of any licence, certificate, scrip or any instrument bestowing financial or fiscal benefits can only be “for good and sufficient reasons”. The requirement of giving reasons cannot therefore, be dispensed with and is mandatory - Even otherwise, it is now firmly established that even an administrative decision having civil consequences must record reasons as a mandatory ....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 636 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Permission for re-export of imported diamonds on paying the penalty and redemption fine - Import of rough diamonds without KP (Kimberly Process) certificate - challenge on the ground that there was only a procedural defect in the import carried out and there is now a certificate issued as required under Exhibit P5 Circular - HELD THAT:- Exhibit P10 is not a KP Certificate issued for the export of goods from UAE, which alone would validate its import into India. Exhibit P10 is a mere 'Technical Certificate' issued for sending back the goods to UAE, from which country the goods were sourced from. The certificate enables export, to carry out which the appellant would have to first get the goods released by paying the redemption fee and penalty since already the goods are confiscated. A reading of Exhibit P5, hence, makes it mandatory....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 635 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Physical presence of the petitioner for enquiry - Detention of goods - permission to petitioners to have food and medicines if enquiry by the officers of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence Office (DRI) were to stretch for long duration - HELD THAT:- Food and medicines are essential requirements. Shri. Aravind has fairly submitted that petitioners may carry food and medicine. This petition is disposed of with following: (i) Petitioners shall appear on 17.11.2020 in DRI office for further enquiry; (ii) They shall be permitted to carry their own food and medicines; and (iii) Enquiry shall be conducted during the office hours and completed as expeditiously as possible.
- 2020 (11) TMI 634 - CESTAT KOLKATA
Application for out of turn hearing of the appeal - HELD THAT:- Because of the unavoidable circumstances, the matter could not be listed for hearing as there was no sitting of Bench. In the meantime, the appellants have filed this Miscellaneous Application on 17.06.2020 for early hearing of the matter. When the appeal has already been listed on board for hearing, there was no occasion to file this Miscellaneous Application. Subsequently, in view of Public Notice No.1 of 2020 dated 30.06.2020, the appellants were required to file their application as per format as prescribed in Annexure-II. I find from the records that they have filed the application in Annexure-II on 20.08.2020. The Miscellaneous Application for out of turn hearing of the appeal is dismissed as infructuous.
- 2020 (11) TMI 633 - CESTAT KOLKATA
Maintainability of appeal - time limitation - appellant submits that the period of limitation has been calculated from the date of issuance of the order which is 3rd October 2018 whereas the statutory provisions provided that the period of limitation should be calculated from the date of receipt of the order - HELD THAT:- If the date of receipt of the order is taken into consideration, it is observed that the appeal was filed within the statutory period of 60(sixty) days and there was no delay in filing the appeal - Since the learned Commissioner(Appeals) has not decided the appeal before him on merits, but dismissed the same as time barred, it would be appropriate to remand the matter to the learned Commissioner(Appeals) to decide the appeal on merits. It is also categorically mentioned that there is no delay in filing the appeal before the lower appellate authority, therefore, there is no occasion to visit the aspect of limitation. Appeal allowed by way of remand.
- 2020 (11) TMI 593 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Levy of Light Dues Charges and Port Charges - applicant has made a grievance that respondent No.1 is levying “light dues charges’ for the entire one months’ period though the ship was delivered to the applicant on 11.11.2020 - HELD THAT:- All the contentions of the parties regarding the legality and justifiability of the quantum of charges claimed by the Port Trust can be considered while determining the entitlement of the parties to the amount to be deposited with the office of Sheriff of Mumbai. All the contentions are, thus, kept open for consideration. The applicant - M/s. NKD Maritime Limited shall deposit a sum of Rs. ₹ 1,58,59,737/- with the office of Sheriff of Mumbai by tomorrow, 19.11.2020 - matter be listed on 2nd December 2020.
- 2020 (11) TMI 592 - CESTAT KOLKATA
Continuation of Suspension of Customs Broker License - Smuggling - foreign origin cigarettes - Regulation 19(2) of CBLR, 2013 - appellant has failed to verify the antecedent and functioning of the client by using reliable and independent sources - violation of provisions of Regulation 11(n) of CBLR, 2013 - cross-examination not allowed - Violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- The learned Commissioner has not allowed cross-examination at his level but depended on the enquiry report wherein the cross-examination of Mr. Maswood Ahmed but it was held that cross-examination of Shri Abid Ali could not be undertaken. We find that this is not the spirit of the order of this Bench. Instead of delegating the directions given by this Bench to the Enquiry Officer, the Commissioner should have himself allowed the cross-examination as....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 591 - CESTAT KOLKATA
Continuation of suspension of the CB licence - HELD THAT:- Shri Babul Dey joined the Customs Broker firm in July 2018, but the Customs Broker did not get him duly approved by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs. It is alleged that M/s.M.K.Saha & Company has violated the provision of Regulation 10(B) of CBLR, 2018. In the present case, the licence of CB was suspended under CB Order No.12/2019 dated 18.2.19. However, prior to the suspension, a Customs Broker Circular No.08/2019 dated 8.2.19 was issued in connection with the issue under consideration. The suspension was ordered by the Customs Authority on the basis of investigation report dated 31.1.19 issued by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Kolkata Zonal Unit with respect to one export consignment of M/s. Skivvies Textile wherein apparently....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 590 - CESTAT MUMBAI
Smuggling - Smart Watches - Foreign origin goods - applicability of Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962 - burden to prove - Confiscation of 5543 smart watches - levy of Redemption fine and penalty - HELD THAT:- Admittedly the items under seizure are having a watch module which is for displaying the time. In our view the essential character of the item under consideration is that of a watch and is bought and sold as a watch in the trade. Just because certain other functions are inscribed in the said device it will not essentially go beyond the meaning of word watch as used in section 123 - the burden to establish that the seized smart watches are covered by the expression “watch” used in the Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962. Whether Appellants have discharged the necessary burden to establish that these smart watches have ....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 589 - CESTAT BANGALORE
Revocation of Customs Broker licence - forfeiture of security deposit - imposition of penalty - allegation on the appellant is that their executive has broken the seal of the container without the permission of the proper officer and thereby violated various regulations of CBLR 2018 - HELD THAT:- The defense of the appellant from the very beginning is that they have submitted the explanation to the Assistant Commissioner of Import, SIIB, Nhava Sheva and as per that the Customs endorsed the Bill of Entry and thereafter job order was issued by the Custodian and the seal was cut by the Seal Cutter Shri Shantaaram after informing the Examining Officer. Further we find that the enquiry officer in spite of the fact that the appellant raised this objection, did not bother to examine the Seal Cutter Shri Shantaaram who allegedly cut the seal afte....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 588 - CESTAT MUMBAI
Early hearing of the appeal - Application sought on the ground that after suspension of the license, the employees of the appellants are jobless and causing undue hardship to the appellant and their employees - HELD THAT:- The miscellaneous application for early hearing of the appeal is allowed. Appeal will be heard on 03.12.2020.