|
Advanced Search Options
Customs - High Court - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 8461 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 (2) TMI 1109 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Confiscation of imported goods - Old/Used Analogue Photocopiers and Old/Used Digital Multi functional (Print and Copying) Machines - restricted goods - appellant did not produce the license for import of the said machines - redetermination of value of the goods under Rule 9 of the Customs Valuation [Determination of Price of Imported Goods] Rules, 2007 - appraisal of value of goods - whether the finding rendered by the Tribunal holding that what was imported by the appellant was a restricted item was correct? - whether the reasons assigned by the Tribunal to confirm the order of the adjudicating authority calls for any interference? - HELD THAT:- The appellant had imported 36 units of Old/Used Analogue Photocopiers without obtaining a license. Having accepted the stand taken by the Department, the appellant requested that his case may be ....... + More
- 2021 (2) TMI 1101 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Benefits under Merchandise Exports from India Scheme (MEIS) - product of vitrified tiles exported to Sri Lanka - case of petitioner that Public Notice had been amended on 04.05.2016 being the Public Notice No.6 of 2015-20 and MEIS scheme was extended to the export made to Sri Lanka at the rate of 2% interest - It is averred by the petitioner that the policy permits the eligibility of the goods which had been exported by the petitioner under the MEIS scheme and it is only the procedural lapse which has resulted into his being denied the benefit of the said scheme - HELD THAT:- Having noticed that the case of the petitioner falls under the MEIS which is a scheme meant for promoting the export, these are the rewards under the MEIS payable as percentage mentioned in the scheme itself can be transferred for the payment of number of duties....... + More
- 2021 (2) TMI 1100 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Seeking direction to release goods imported - county of origin of the consignment - Section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT:- The determination of origin of the consignment is best left to the authorities as it involves examination of documents and relevant material. The respondents are thus directed to commence proceedings for investigation, issue a show cause notice at the earliest, complete adjudication and pass an order-in-original within a period of two months from today. Condition imposed for provisional release - HELD THAT:- The direction to the petitioner for furnishing of PD bond and bank guarantee covering the component of anti-dumping duty is sustained. However, the levy of fine and penalty at this stage is pre-mature and this condition is thus dispensed with. In the course of adjudication, the respondent /authorities....... + More
- 2021 (2) TMI 1050 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Seeking provisional release of export consignment - section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT:- The adjudicating authority as may be appointed by respondent No.2 shall pass an appropriate order regarding the prayer of the petitioner for provisional release of the export consignment under section 110A of the Customs Act by taking into consideration all the relevant materials including our order dated 10th February, 2021 - Let such order be passed within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. List this matter on 12th March, 2021.
- 2021 (2) TMI 1039 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Principles of Natural Justice - opportunity of personal hearing sought, but not provided - Request for waiver of Cost Recovery Charges made by the appellant rejected - HELD THAT:- The appellant had specifically sought for an opportunity of personal hearing. It is not the case of the Department that there is no necessity for affording an opportunity of personal hearing. In fact in taxing statutes, when decisions are taken, an opportunity of personal hearing could go a long way to resolve very complicated issues, apart from giving satisfaction to the assessee that all materials, which are available with them, were placed for consideration before the adjudicating authority. One more fact which is to be noted is that the request made by the appellant was kept pending for several years and only after an order was passed in the earlier writ pet....... + More
- 2021 (2) TMI 985 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Refund of countervailing duty (CVD) - import of mobile handsets including cellular phones falling under Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 8517 - HELD THAT:- The issue raised in this writ petition would require further examination. Issue notice returnable after six weeks - Stand over to 9th April, 2021.
- 2021 (2) TMI 981 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Smuggling - Gold - validity of SCN - As per submission of the petitioner, the allegations made in the Show Cause Notice are vague allegations without any corresponding data - Principles of Natural Justice - HELD THAT:- The respondents are empowered to confiscate the goods and impose penalty by issuing Show Cause Notice after considering the representation as well as on hearing the affected persons. The Show Cause Notice at Ext.P13 contains an allegation that the petitioner had carried gold weighing 94 kgms during the period from 01.07.2019 to 15.10.2019 by train. The international value of the gold is stated to be 1,21,01,80,608/-. The Show Cause Notice names two carriers allegedly engaged by the petitioner. Averment in the Show Cause Notice is to the effect that the petitioner has engaged in the illegal act of bringing gold received from....... + More
- 2021 (2) TMI 923 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Seizure of goods - Mis-classification of imported goods - import and trading of “Food Items” especially “Masalas” of different flavours - it was opined by the Officers of Customs that the goods were mis declared in terms of classification in so far as the same were mis classified under CTH 09109100, instead the same shall fall under Customs Tariff Heading 21039040 attracting IGST at the rate of 12% instead of 5%, thus leading to shortfall of Customs Duty - HELD THAT:- The petitioner has made a details representation dated 25.01.2021 (Annexure P-10) and reminder dated 01.02.2021 (Annexure P-11), but no action has been taken thereon till date. Notice of motion. This petition is disposed of by giving direction to respondent No.3-Additional Commissioner of Customs to look into the representation/ reminder dated 25.01.2....... + More
- 2021 (2) TMI 920 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Seeking provisional release of goods - stand of the petitioner is that they have already been mutilated and that therefore, their import is free - HELD THAT:- When the petitioner is entitled to call upon the customs authority to mutilate the goods and clear them thereafter and when the petitioner has not invoked his right under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962, the third respondent could not have passed the impugned order. In this view of the matter, the impugned order is quashed. The respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to have the goods mutilated at the cost of the petitioner, but under the supervision of the third respondent. As agreed by the petitioner, the goods of mutilation will be included in FOB. The entire exercise will be concluded within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order........ + More
- 2021 (2) TMI 919 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Service of relied on documents - Levy of penalty under Section 114(iii) and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962 - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- In the impugned order, though it is admitted that the reply was received in response to the show cause notice from the petitioner, this contention as regards the non-supply of the relied on documents was not dealt with or controverted - Nothing stopped the adjudicating authority from averring in the impugned order that the contention taken by the noticee/petitioner herein was false. He could have also furnished proof of having served the documents in question on the petitioner. Such an averment or finding is totally absent in the impugned order. The petitioner's counsel also drew my attention to yet another aspect. At page No.85 of the typed set of papers, the Speed Post cover in whic....... + More
- 2021 (2) TMI 918 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Seeking to initiate the proceedings in time bound manner - seeking direction directing respondent no.6 to remove the Import Export Code placed under the Denied Entity List of Directorate General of Foreign Trade - HELD THAT:- This writ-application is disposed off with a direction to the Joint Director General, DGGI, Zonal Unit Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad to immediately look into the representation dated 26th September 2020; Annexure-J; Page-46 to this writ-application and take an appropriate decision in accordance with law with a period of four weeks from the date of the receipt of this order. We also direct the Joint Director General of Foreign Trade, Surat to look into the representation dated 5th November, 2020 at Annexure-Q; Page-68 and take an appropriate decision in accordance with law with a period of four weeks from the date of the receipt of this order.
- 2021 (2) TMI 912 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Request of the petitioner for release of goods was directed provisionally after obtaining the bond for the full value of seized goods and after taking the bank guarantee as a security deposit - HELD THAT:- The petition does not call for further adjudication. It is to be noticed that the ground of levy of differential duty of ₹ 1,18,04,236/- is a matter which the petitioner submits is being pursued by way of challenge before the Appellate Authority, which the petitioner intends to pursue. The respondent is directed to permit the petitioner to lift the goods under seizure and such release is however subject to the final outcome of appeal to be filed - Petition disposed off.
- 2021 (2) TMI 906 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Auction - inaction on the part of the original consignees, who had not come forward firstly to submit bills of entry followed by the non-clearance of the goods for home consumption or warehousing or transhipping within 30 days from the date of unloading the containers at the custom station, as required under Section 48 of the said Act - CBIC Circular No.49/2018-Customs, dated 03.02.2018 - HELD THAT:- The admitted position is that the goods in 113 containers reached at ICD, Sonepat, in the months of May and June, 2020. After the nationwide lockdown because of COVID-19 pandemic, the unlocking of the said lockdown started w.e.f. 08.06.2020. Thereafter, there was ample time for the importers to respond and get cleared the goods. Despite three notices having been sent to each of the importers over a period of time, none of them turned up to cl....... + More
- 2021 (2) TMI 905 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Seeking finalization of provisionally assessed bills of entry, beyond a period of 8-9 years - import of Pressed Distillated - Section 18(1)(b) of the Customs Act 1962 - HELD THAT:- In the case of M/S GPI TEXTILES LIMITED VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [2018 (9) TMI 25 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT], it was held that The notices in the present cases having been issued more than decade back and the proceedings having not been concluded within reasonable time, the same deserves to be quashed. The impugned notices for framing final assessment of provisional assessment are hereby quashed - petition allowed.
- 2021 (2) TMI 852 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Seeking a direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to have an advocate in the event of interrogation of the petitioner at a visible but not audible distance - seeking permission for videography of the proceedings pertaining to interrogation of the petitioner - HELD THAT:- On the prayer made by the petitioner, it is stated that customs department has no objection to permit presence of advocate at visible but not audible distance and to allow videography of the proceeding at the cost of the petitioner - In view of the statement made by the Principal Commissioner of Customs, the apprehension and grievance expressed by the petitioner has been redressed. It is directed that in the event of petitioner being subjected to interrogation by the respondents, he shall be allowed to have an advocate at a visible but not audible distance and the process of interrogation shall be videographed at the cost of the petitioner - petition disposed off.
- 2021 (2) TMI 842 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Applicability of time limitation on demand of Customs Duty - invocation of extended period of limitation when there is no suppression of facts - Jurisdiction to levy of penalty u/s 112 of CA - invocation of section 112 for the first time - HELD THAT:- The demand of duty for violating the post importation condition of an exemption notification is not confined to any period of limitation and hence there is no relevancy in the argument of the Appellants that they did not suppress any material facts. Just because the Tribunal has wrongly interpreted the order passed in the BOMBAY HOSPITAL TRUST VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, SAHAR, MUMBAI [2005 (10) TMI 112 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] Case or the Revenue was indifferent to such wrong interpretation and the resultant effect, this Court can not make an unnecessary exercise by analyzing the fact whether ....... + More
- 2021 (2) TMI 830 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Smuggling - prosecution has mixed all the packets and thereafter, sent to FSL for examination - offences under Sections 8/22/23/29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - HELD THAT:- In Basant Rai [2012 (7) TMI 1115 - DELHI HIGH COURT], while dealing with a case where accused was found carrying a polythene bag containing 8 similar polythene bags having brown colour substance and Investigating Officer took small pieces of charas from each packet, mixed the same and drew two sample parcels which were sent to FSL for analysis and it was held that if the 08 packets were allegedly recovered from the appellant and only two packets were having contraband substance and rest 6 packets did not have any contraband; though all may be of the same colour, when we mix the substances of all 8 packets into one or two; then definitely, th....... + More
- 2021 (2) TMI 826 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Provisional release of seized goods - imported old and used digital multifunction print, copying and scanning machines of A3 size - Section 110 A of Customs Act. Interim release of goods - HELD THAT:- The Bench has stated that in such circumstances, it would not be appropriate to take a different view only in the case of some assesses while others have obtained the benefit of release. The present petitioners are also equally entitled to the benefit of release of goods, as sought. Whether the condition imposed by MeitY is mandatory and whether non-compliance of the same would lead to confiscation? - HELD THAT:- The question as to whether the condition imposed by MeitY is mandatory and whether non-compliance of the same would lead to confiscation, has been decided by the High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad in RR Marketing V. The Union of I....... + More
- 2021 (2) TMI 810 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Jurisdiction - power of proper officer to issue SCN - HELD THAT:- The matter is directed to appear on 3rd March, 2021 for further consideration. The petitioner, in the meantime, shall cooperate with the adjudication in terms of the two show-cause notices. However, the adjudication order in respect of the petitioner shall not be published and communicated without the leave of this Court.
- 2021 (2) TMI 807 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Principles of Natural Justice - denial of opportunity of cross-examination - HELD THAT:- It is not in dispute that there is no formal order of denial of cross-examination of witness, pursuant to the applications made by the petitioner dated 20.10.2020 and 02.11.2020. Let the order be passed by the concerned officer, FIRSTLY, on the aspect of cross-examination of witness. This shall be done, BEFORE the order in original is delivered. Further, the grievance with regard to non-supply of certain documentary evidences, being the facet of the principles of natural justice, the same shall be regarded by the officer concerned and shall be decided ALONG WITH the application, seeking cross-examination of witness. Since, this matter is being disposed of in limini, this Court has expressed no opinion on the same on merit - Application disposed off.
........
|
