|
Advanced Search Options
Customs - Appellate Tribunal - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 35 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 and Decision etc.
-
2023 (1) TMI 1194
Refund of the Customs Duty paid in respect of the imported goods - permission to re-export the imported goods - rejection of refund only on the ground that the refund claim of the appellant was hit by the provisions of Section 26A (3) ibid - HELD THAT:- The provisions of Section 26A and 27 of the Customs Act operate in different situations: Section 26A (1) specifically covers the refund of import duty in certain cases where the imported goods are found to be defective or not in conformity with the specifications, are identified to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner, there is no claim of drawback and such goods are exported or the importer abandons the goods or they are destroyed or rendered commercially valueless. Thus, all the conditions at (a), (b), (c) and (d) provided under Section 26A (1) are to be satisfied cumulatively ....... + More
-
2023 (1) TMI 1149
Levy of penalty of various persons - Allegation of abating the Smuggling - Detention of goods - illegal removal of the container using forged documents from the customs area - creation of forged out of charge (OOC) and Pass- out documents and handing over documents for clearance to Karthikeyan and told him to take delivery - HELD THAT:- There is much contradiction as to the dates on which the container was removed. The investigation of the removal of this container was taken up along with alleged illegal removal of containers in respect of five other bills of entry. However, the date of removal of the container of this case is not satisfactorily established. That apart from the statement of Shri Karthikeyan, there is nothing to establish that the appellant had any role in forging documents or removing the container from the CFS area. The ....... + More
-
2023 (1) TMI 1148
Imposition of penalty u/s under Section 112 and Section 114 AA of the Act - using fake/fabricated gate passes and on being unsuccessful, have filed bill of entry on forged/fabricated Air Way Bill (AWB) - removal of imported goods on fake gate passes without filing bill of entry - HELD THAT:- Shri Dhananjay Kumar Singh is the kingpin in the attempted removal of valuable cargo from Customs-Custodian by resorting to forgery and other acts of omissions and commissions. It is he, who received instructions from Ms. Sonia of Hong Kong for removal of cargo from the Customs Department of India without filing bill of entry. For this work, Ms. Sonia agreed for giving remuneration @Rs.750/- per kg. or Rs.7,00,000/- approximately. Thereafter, Shri Dhananjay Kumar Singh, who was handling the clearance for Shri Mohit Jain of M/s.Shankeshwar Impex, used ....... + More
-
2023 (1) TMI 1107
Refund of Special Additional Duty of Customs (SAD) - Can the refund can be claimed after the period prescribed by the Notification No.102/2007-Cus. dated 14.09.2007? - HELD THAT:- It is the first principle of law that justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done. It is clear from the impugned order that the appellant has not been heard, for whatever reason, and without following the principle of natural justice, the appeal has been decided against the appellant. There are force in the submissions of learned Counsel that this ground itself is sufficient for setting aside the impugned order and therefore without going into the merits of the matter, the case is remanded to the 1st Appellate Authority to decide the Appeal afresh after giving due notice to the appellant for personal hearing and also giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the appellant. The appeal is accordingly, allowed by way of remand to the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals).
-
2023 (1) TMI 1059
Levy of Anti-dumping duty - exports by Xinyi Energy - submission is that its exports to India by Xinyi Energy are not at dumped prices, and the determination of the dumping margin by the designated authority in the final findings is erroneous for the reason that it is based on a faulty determination of the normal value and export price. Whether the designated authority was justified in making deductions from the export price of Xinyi Energy on account of liaison office? - HELD THAT:- A person who is not a resident of India can open a branch office or a liaison office only with the prior approval of the Reserve Bank of India and in accordance with the Regulations. Secondly, the liaison office cannot undertake any commercial/trading/industrial activity directly or indirectly. The domestic industry has not brought on record any evidence to s....... + More
-
2023 (1) TMI 1058
Benefit of exemption from health cess under Notification No. 08/2020-Cus have been wrongly refused to them - import of SPECTROMETERS (MODEL 800MB) and parts thereof - HELD THAT:- Admittedly, appellant have not claimed the exemption in the Bill of Entry, secondly, these new evidences have been brought before this Tribunal for the first time. Accordingly, these appeals are allowed by way of remand to the Commissioner (Appeals), with the direction to peruse the evidence laid before him by the appellant-assessee and on being satisfied that these spectrometers have not been used for medical purpose, shall allow the exemption accordingly. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed by way of remand.
-
2023 (1) TMI 1057
Interest on the refund amount of pre-deposit - rejection on the ground that original copy of bill of entry and TR-6 challan could not be made available - HELD THAT:- The learned Commissioner (Appeals) have rightly held that the amount remained with the revenue unadjusted by way of pre-deposit. It is further found under the facts and circumstances, that such pre-deposit was made under protest which is writ large on the face of the record. There is no merits on the grounds of appeal raised by revenue. Relying on the ruling of the Division Bench of this Tribunal in M/S. PARLE AGRO PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL GOODS & SERVICE TAX, NOIDA (VICE-VERSA) [2021 (5) TMI 870 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD], the Cross-objections with directions to the revenue to grant interest @ 6% per annum from the date of deposit till the date of refund. Such int....... + More
-
2023 (1) TMI 1056
Violation of conditions of Exemption notification - ‘flying training' Aircraft - Allegation of misuse for ‘charter service’ - Confiscation of eight CESSNA 172R Aircrafts with redemption fine imposed - recovery of import duty forgone on the import of eight CESSNA Aircrafts import duty forgone on imports of spare parts for maintenance of the said aircrafts with interest - levy of penalty - acts of omission and commission - Jurisdiction of customs authorities to decide violation of the exemption notification. HELD THAT:- the appellant had initially imported Aircrafts for flying training purpose and had given such an undertaking to the customs authorities. The DGCA had also granted permits to the appellant. It is subsequently on 23.04.2009 that the appellant submitted an application before the MCA for grant of a No Objec....... + More
-
2023 (1) TMI 999
Levy of Anti-Dumping Duty - effective date of the notification -import of two consignments of Propylene Glycol from USA falling under CTH 29053200 - N/N. 117/2009-Cus., dated 13-10-2009 extending the N/N. 105/2004-Cus., dated 8-10-2004 - HELD THAT:- The issue involved in the present matter is whether Anti-dumping duty on Propylene Glycol, which was imposed by Notification No. 105/2004 dtd. 08.10.2004 and which came to an end on 08.10.2009 by virtue of Section 9A(5) of the Customs Act, 1962, can be demanded in respect of goods imported after 08.10.2009, when the same had not been extended before the said expiry on 08.10.2009 and whether the extension after the said expiry by Notification No. 117/2009 dtd. 13.10.2009 is valid in law. The demand confirmed by the adjudicating authority is not sustainable - Appeal allowed.
-
2023 (1) TMI 998
Classification of goods - 0.1 percent natural brassinolide fertiliser - Nature and scope of SCN under section 28 of Customs Act - power of proper officer to review the assessment under section 28 - Whether SCN under section 28 can be issued after the assessment is finalized (either through self assessment or through assessment by an officer) without first appealing against the assessment? - extended period of limitation - penalties. Scope of remand - HELD THAT:- There is nothing in the order of remand to show that the Commissioner was required to examine Chapter Note 1(a) (2) of Chapter heading 3808 partly only to the extent of the submissions by the learned counsel. The submission of the learned counsel that the scope of the Tribunal’s order gets circumscribed by the appellant’s submissions during the proceedings cannot be ac....... + More
-
2023 (1) TMI 948
Confiscation of imported aircraft - non-scheduled operator permit (charter) issued by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation [DGCA] - levy of customs duty and penalty under section 112 of the Customs Act - HELD THAT:- Aircrafts and helicopters are classified under Customs Tariff Heading 88 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The tariff rate of duty till 28.02.2007 on the import of aircraft was 3%/12.5%. Subsequently, pursuant to the proposal made in the Finance Bill 2007, exemption notification no. 20/2009 dated 01.03.2007 was issued inserting Entry 346B and Condition No. 101 in the earlier exemption notification dated 01.03.2002, whereby, the effective rate of duty on import of aircraft for scheduled air transport service was made ‘nil’. No exemption was, however, granted to nonscheduled air transport se....... + More
-
2023 (1) TMI 908
EPCG scheme - Failure to fulfill the conditions of the Notification as the Export Obligation Discharge Certificate [the EODC] was not submitted within the stipulated time - HELD THAT:- It is not in dispute that the license that was issued to the appellant under the EPCG Scheme mentions the export obligation period is twelve years. This fact has neither been disputed in the show cause notice nor in the two orders passed by the Additional Commissioner and the Commissioner (Appeals). The show cause notice, in fact, does not even mention the obligation period and only makes a general allegation that the appellant had failed to fulfill the conditions of the notification and submit the requisite evidence within the prescribed period regarding fulfillment of export obligation - It is non-submission of the Certificate of fulfillment of export obl....... + More
-
2023 (1) TMI 878
Refund of SAD - non-submission of Calculation-Cum-Co-relation sheet, Sale invoices for respective Bills of Entry, VAT/CST challan and returns, Summary of sale invoices and Authority letter - CA certificate not available - HELD THAT:- The issue herein is squarely covered by the interpretation of the Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of CHOWGULE & COMPANY PVT LTD VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS & CENTRAL EXCISE [2014 (8) TMI 214 - CESTAT MUMBAI (LB)] in favour of the appellant-assessee where it was held that A trader-importer, who paid SAD on the imported goods and who discharged VAT/ST liability on subsequent sale, and who issued commercial invoices without indicating any details of the duty paid, would be entitled to the benefit of exemption under Notification 102/2007-Cus, notwithstanding the fact that he made no endorseme....... + More
-
2023 (1) TMI 814
Levy of penalty u/s 112(a)(i) of CA - Violation of import conditions - Import through specified agencies - High seas sale - import of Urea purchased by the appellants on High Seas Sale from State Trading Enterprises (STEs) - whether the import is in accordance with the ITC (HS) Policy? HELD THAT:- It emerges that the purchase from the foreign suppliers was made by STE viz. MMTC and Indian Potash Ltd and the goods were shipped by the foreign suppliers to MMTC/ Indian Potash Ltd and the Appellants have purchased the said goods on High Seas from the MMTC/Indian Potash Ltd. It can be seen that Heading No.3102 1000 of the ITC (HS) Policy 2009-2015, does not stipulate that Urea was allowed to be imported only by State Trading Enterprises; the said Heading allows import of Urea through STC, MMTC and Indian Potash Limited. Clearly, the word used ....... + More
-
2023 (1) TMI 750
Confiscation of goods - Violation of provisions of Import Policy since the Pre-Shipment Inspection (PSI) Certificate furnished was not as per Appendix-28 of the Foreign Trade Policy - redemption of the goods in lieu of confiscation was allowed on payment of redemption fine - penalty imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. Whether the PSI certificate submitted by the appellant-importer was sufficient compliance with Appendix-28 ibid. and that the authorities are justified in ordering confiscation and offering redemption fine in lieu of the same? HELD THAT:- In the first place, there should be an improper import of goods leading to confiscation of the same. Here, there is no dispute that the PSI certificate which was furnished was complete in all respects, except the fact that the same was issued by the Branch Office. This im....... + More
-
2023 (1) TMI 749
Smuggling - Seizure of mobile handsets of Chinese origin - bogus or fake invoices submitted by the truck Driver and transport company in respect of the mobile handsets - It further appeared to the Customs Department that the owner of the mobile handsets was the appellant in view of the no objection certificate issued by the transporter in his favour - HELD THAT:- Admittedly the goods under dispute, Chinese mobile phones have been purchased by the appellant from open market in Delhi. Such contention is also supported by the statement and evidence led by the transporter. Appellant have also produced documents of transport before the Tribunal as well as the bilties that the goods were being transported from Delhi to Ahmedabad. Further, appellant had appeared before the Customs Department and had claimed the goods. Admittedly, no other person....... + More
-
2023 (1) TMI 599
Rejection of refund of cash security deposit - rejection of refund on the ground that the appellant’s claim was barred by limitation in terms of Section 27(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT:- It is not the case of the Revenue that what the appellant claimed was the refund of the duty paid and there is also no dispute that the appellant claimed only the security deposit made. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (EXPORT), CHENNAI-1 VERSUS CABLE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. [2008 (6) TMI 210 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS] has considered a similar issue and has held that Section 27 which speaks about the refund of the duty cannot be pressed into service to deny refund of the amount covered under the bank guarantee which has been negotiated by the department. Thus, it is very much ....... + More
-
2023 (1) TMI 556
Seeking provisional release of goods - reduction in bank guarantee for provisional release of the seized goods to 10% of the value of goods - mis-declaration in terms of value and also in terms of percentage of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) - HELD THAT:- There was allegation of mis-declaration of the value of the goods which has been admitted to by the appellant in letters and statements. The SCN demanded differential duty which the appellant has already deposited. The SCN has also proposed confiscation of the goods under Sections 111(l) and 111(m). After adjudication, if the goods are held liable for confiscation, they may be released on payment of redemption fine. The present case of provisional release of goods needs to be seen in this context. If the goods are confiscated and allowed redemption on payment of fine such fine has to be recove....... + More
-
2023 (1) TMI 555
Absolute Confiscation of re-imported goods - petroleum coke - imposition of penalty under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act - rejection of the goods by the Buyer, and were accompanied with re-export invoice - HELD THAT:- The learned Commissioner (Appeals) have recorded the findings that the appellant had purchased the goods for export and on being rejected by the buyer in Saudi Arabia, the goods have been re-imported and admittedly, appellant have not availed any export benefit on the impugned goods - both the identity of the goods is also established and also that the appellant had genuinely exported the goods to the user buyer in Saudi Arabia. Further, on rejection by the buyer, the appellant was obligated to re-import the goods to mitigate his loss. Further, admittedly, the re-imported goods have been found to be CPC. The minor variati....... + More
-
2023 (1) TMI 463
Levy of penalty and redemption fine - Classification of export goods under MEIS scheme - misdeclaration of Country of Origin in the export document so as to claim the export incentives under MEIS - whether the classification of Blood Glucose Test Strips was mis-declared as CTH 30069100 instead of the correct CTH 38220090? - Confiscation - redemption fine - penalty - HELD THAT:- The appellant made a wrong claim of export benefit under MEIS, being mis-advised by the CHA. However, it was the responsibility of the appellant to understand the eligibility and the conditions before making a claim for the export benefits. However, in the facts and circumstances, that the goods were not prohibited goods, it is found that the fine and penalty are on the higher side. Accordingly, the impugned order is modified - Redemption fine is reduced from Rs. 4 lakhs to Rs. 1 lakh - Penalty under Section 114(iii) is reduced from Rs. 50,000/- to Rs. 25,000/-. Appeal allowed in part.
|
