Advanced Search Options
Customs - High Court - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 27 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.
- 2021 (5) TMI 979 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Refund of IGST - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- As the Respondents have not taken any final decision on the refund sought, it is directed the concerned Respondents to decide the claim of the Petitioner for refund of the aforesaid amount under the Integrated Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 as expeditiously as possible and practicable in accordance with law, rules, regulations, Government policies including principles of unjust enrichment as propounded by Hon’ble Supreme Court in MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LTD. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA [1996 (12) TMI 50 - SUPREME COURT] and on the basis of evidence on record. Petition disposed off.
- 2021 (5) TMI 976 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Smuggling - Gold - It is the case of the petitioner that since the respondent appeared to have committed offences punishable under Sections 132 and 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT:- Perusal of the record shows that the respondent is a native of Afghanistan and there is every possibility that he would abscond and fail to return to India in case he is permitted to go to his country at this stage and thus misuse his liberty. The investigation in the present case is still underway and charge sheet is yet to be filed. In case, the petitioner is allowed to leave the country, the same will hamper further investigation of this case and the filing of the charge sheet. Moreover, keeping in view the nature and gravity of the allegations, it is not a fit case where permission to go abroad should be granted. The petition stands allowed.
- 2021 (5) TMI 932 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Time Limitation period for filing a suit for malicious prosecution, against the customs authorities/officials - Section 155(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT:- A reading of Section 155(2) of the Customs Act, 1962, shows that the earlier Section (in the Sea Customs Act, 1878), has simply been merged and set out in continuity. The side headings of the provision have also been omitted. A cause for confusion has thus arisen, leading to varying interpretations of this provision by different Courts - A perusal of the provisions of The Limitation Act, 1963, shows that the period of limitation for filing of a suit for malicious prosecution is one year, from the date when the Plaintiff is acquitted or when the prosecution against the Plaintiff is otherwise terminated. In the present case, the Plaintiff was acquitted on 11th April 2007. Paral....... + More
- 2021 (5) TMI 876 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Maintainability of petition - association can file appeal or not - Levy of interest for delayed payment under the DEPB Scheme - difference between the DEEC and DEPB schemes - HELD THAT:- In view of the dictum laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in MAHINDER KUMAR GUPTA AND ORS. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA (UOI) AND ORS. [1994 (9) TMI 369 - SUPREME COURT] holding the an Association cannot file writ petition seeking relief espousing the cause of its individual members and does not affect any legal right of that Association, it is also not possible to entertain these writ petitions for that reason. Petition dismissed.
- 2021 (5) TMI 742 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Levy of IGST on oxygen concentrators - right to health and affordable treatment - Whether the State's action, of imposing IGST on oxygen concentrators, which were directly imported by individuals, albeit free of cost, without the aid of a canalising agency runs afoul of Article 14 of the Constitution? - HELD THAT:- On the day, when the instant petition was served on the Standing Counsel for the State, i.e., 03.052021, yet another notification bearing no. 4/2021-Customs, dated 03.05.2021, was issued by the State; this time, by exercising powers under Section 25(2)5 of the Customs Act. Through this notification, the State, inter alia, exempted the imposition of IGST on oxygen concentrators subject to the conditions provided in the annexure appended to the said notification - The conditions prescribed in the notification dated 03.05.2021....... + More
- 2021 (5) TMI 740 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
IGST refunds - allegation of exported to avail undue export benefits - Provisional release of goods - grievance of the petitioner pertains to withholding of IGST refund and instructions/directives issued to the petitioner’s banker not to accept related remittances - HELD THAT:- it is now clear that the subject goods/consignment have been released provisionally. Now the grievance of the petitioner pertains to withholding of IGST refund and instructions/directives issued to the petitioner’s banker not to accept related remittances. The above grievances are directly relatable to validity of the seizure dated 28.08.2020. From a reading of section 110, more particularly sub section (1) thereof, it is discernible that seizure is not an end in itself. Seizure can be made only if the proper officer has reason to believe that any goods....... + More
- 2021 (5) TMI 737 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Trading House - license for import of Maize in concessional rate of duty - allegation of breach of the ‘actual user’ condition in the licences by the petitioner - petitioner sought adjustment of amount deposited during investigation towards the demand - HELD THAT:- The licences were granted by respondent No.1 subject to the 'actual user' condition and other usual conditions of import. This Court noted that all the show cause notices emanated from the alleged violation of the 'actual user' condition contained in the two licences. Therefore, High Court was of the view that it would be in the fitness of things if the two notices dated 30.08.2013 with regard to the licences be first concluded on an expeditious basis and thereafter the notice dated 04.09.2013 issued by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence be adju....... + More
- 2021 (5) TMI 596 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Adjudicating SCN after long gap of 11 years - Matter was kept pending - Validity of Less Charge Demand Notice - concessional rate of duty - Import of certain second hand equipments, i.e. capital goods/professional equipments - whether the respondent authorities could now be permitted to adjudicate the Demand Notice dated 2.8.2007, more particularly, when no intimation was issued to the petitioner No.1 - company communicating about keeping the adjudication of the Demand Notice in abeyance? - HELD THAT:- This Court, in the case of SIDDHI VINAYAK SYNTEX PVT LTD. VERSUS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & 2 [2017 (3) TMI 1534 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] has in detail held and observed that where the department has kept the proceedings in call books, it would be impermissible for the department to reactivate the same after years together and more particular....... + More
- 2021 (5) TMI 595 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Extension of two years of Export Obligation period with a further request to prospectively grant it for two years - whether the extension as sought for of the authorisation needs to be given to the petitioner in wake of the pendency of the show cause notice dated 05.03.2019 and in total set of facts and circumstances? HELD THAT:- Challenge in this petition is to this suspension of amendment sheet No.3, which had extended two years of Export Obligation period with a further request to prospectively grant it for two years. We could notice that the suspension on the part of the respondent authority is in wake of non-fulfillment of the directions on the part of the petitioner to the communication dated 24.12.2018. After nearly a month from the non-compliance on 22.01.2019, there had been a suspension of the amendment sheet No.3 dated 27.11.20....... + More
- 2021 (5) TMI 553 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT`
Permission for withdrawal of petition - job-work - request made for export of the goods from the job worker premise is rejected - HELD THAT:- The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy of appeal. It is directed that if the appeal is filed by the petitioner within a period of three weeks, the same shall be decided on merits after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
- 2021 (5) TMI 459 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Confiscation - Smuggling - Gold Bars - rejection also on the ground of non-compliance of the provisions of Section 129-E of the Act - order passed under the Act by an officer of the Customs, lower in rank than the Principal Commissioner of Customs or Commissioner of Customs, to file appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) - HELD THAT:- In the instant case, though the petitioner herein initially filed appeal on 17.08.2020, before the third respondent, it is clear from Form-CAI that the appellant undertook to pay the mandatory pre-deposit of 7.5% of the disputed amount but did not make any deposit to the said effect. Obviously, on the ground that the petitioner herein failed to comply with the above referred mandatory requirement of pre-deposit, the third respondent-appellate authority, by way of the order, dated 03.11.2020, rejected the a....... + More
- 2021 (5) TMI 405 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Discharge of the accused under the prevention of corruption of act - officers of Central Excise Department - allegation of fraudulent availing the benefit of DEPB (Duty Entitlement Pass Book) Scheme - mis-declaration of export goods - pieces of cloths irregular in shape declared as ladies nightwear - criminal misconduct - offence under Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - HELD THAT:- In the case in hand, in the adjudication proceedings, it is not proved that the Accused were in any way guilty of the act of omission/dereliction of duty or acting in an illegal manner. Consequently, the Accused nos. 1 and 2 were exonerated on the same set of allegations as has been made in the present case in the adjudication proceedings that too by an order of Appellate Tribunal. In that view of the matter, the determination in the adjud....... + More
- 2021 (5) TMI 327 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Validity of detention and seizure of goods - allegation is that scraps in different forms seized from the premises were found to be imported without payment of appropriate customs duty - classification of goods - discarded and non-serviceable semi-broken/broken motor under CTH 7204 49 00 under the Other Ferrous Waste and scrap or not - jurisdiction to entertain this petition in wake of the availability of the alternative efficacious remedy - HELD THAT:- The law on the point if is regarded, it is quite clear that jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not to be resorted to ordinarily when the alternative and efficacious remedy is available, unless of course the very issuance of notice is not sustainable under the law - The writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is not to be entertained against the show cause notice whe....... + More
- 2021 (5) TMI 326 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Release of imported goods - used ventilators - non-hazardous goods - HELD THAT:- The petitioner has relied upon a certificate of the chartered engineer in support of its contention that the used ventilators imported constitute non-hazardous goods. In my view, the appropriate authority to confirm the nature of goods would not be the chartered engineer. Thus, in the course of adjudication, the assessing authority shall make a reference to the competent authority either under the Hazardous Substance Management Division/R1 or any other authority competent for this purpose, to determine whether the used ventilators imported by the petitioner would constitute hazardous material, bearing in mind the definition of the term in the Hazardous Waste Management Rules 2016. Petition dismissed as withdrawn.
- 2021 (5) TMI 267 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Exemption from imposition of IGST - oxygen concentrators imported by the State Government - N/N. 30/2021-Customs, dated 01.05.2021 - HELD THAT:- The petitioner states that he will deposit the requisite amount with the Registry of this Court within the next three days - In the meanwhile, in case, the oxygen concentrator, sought to be imported by the petitioner, reaches the concerned customs barrier, the same will be released, subject to the petitioner depositing, with this Court, an amount equivalent to IGST presently payable by him, in accordance with the impugned notification, within three days from today. Since the requisite IGST will be deposited by the petitioner, with this Court, the respondent will not levy a charge qua the same on the importing agency, i.e., FedEx Corporation. List the matter on 18.05.2021.
- 2021 (5) TMI 260 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Refund of the redemption fine and penalty remitted - Department application for revision is pending but no stay / interim protection sought against the order of Commissioner (appeals) - HELD THAT:- Admittedly, no interim protection has been obtained by the respondents - Though the provisions of Section 129DD do not expressly provide for seeking or grant of interim protection, such provision for interim protection is implicit in any provision for appeal or revision and this is a position settled by several decisions including a decision of this Court in the context of the Income Tax Act 1961, in the case of Paulsons Litho Works vs. Income-Tax Officer [1993 (11) TMI 50 - MADRAS HIGH COURT]. Thus, in cases where the Customs Department takes re-course to revision before the Government, it is incumbent upon them to also seek interim protection....... + More
- 2021 (5) TMI 224 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Exemption from IGST - Oxygen concentrators imported by the State Government - N/N. 4/2021 - Customs dated 03.05.2021 - HELD THAT:- notification has exempted imposition of IGST on oxygen concentrators imported by the State Government, or via any entity, relief agency or statutory body, authorised by the State Government. This exemption, according to the learned ASG, is, presently, available till 30.06.2021. Since the respondent has gone this far, it could move further, and extend the exemption, to even individuals, to enable them to obtain imported oxygen concentrators by way of a gift, albeit, without having to pay IGST. List the matter on 06.05.2021.
- 2021 (5) TMI 222 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
EPCG Scheme - Amendment in Shipping Bills - mention of the EPCG licence number on the shipping bill, mandatory or not - right to seek to explain, by virtue of other contemporaneous and supporting evidences, the factum of export - HELD THAT:- No doubt requires the mention of both the name of the supporting manufacturer as well as the EPCG authorization number on the shipping bill and in this case both are absent. However, the requirements, though mandatory, are capable of being satisfied constructively as well and non-mention is not fatal to the claim of concessional rate of duty. The provisions of Section 149 of the Customs Act provides a forum to the petitioner to establish this by way of contemporaneous records. Thus, an opportunity must be extended to the petitioner to prove the factum of export through Glovis by way of supporting mate....... + More
- 2021 (5) TMI 221 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Principles of natural justice - seeking Mandamus directing the respondents to pass a speaking order in terms of Section 17 (5) of the Customs Act, 1962 in respect of the Bill of Entry within the time frame as fixed by this Court - HELD THAT:- Respondents would not object to the grant of Mandamus and would assure the Court that a speaking order as prayed for will be passed within a period of six (6) weks from today. As the mandamus sought for stands achieved and nothing further survives in this writ petition, the same is disposed as aforesaid.
- 2021 (5) TMI 220 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Recovery during pendency of litigation - pre-deposit was made - Circular No.1053/2/2017-CX dated 10.03.2017 - Absolute Confiscation - imported branded Watches - HELD THAT:- The Central Board of Excise and Customs has specifically addressed the question of recovery during pendency of litigation in the said circular and has held that Once the amount is paid, no coercive action shall be taken for recovery of the balance amount during the pendency of the appeal proceedings before these authorities. In the light of the categoric statement of the Board to the effect that no coercive action shall be taken for recovery of any balance of disputed dues, once the pre-deposit is made, the present communication has no legs to stand - petition disposed off.