Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Manuals Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Case Laws
Home Case Index All Cases Customs HC Customs - HC
Law
Court
Citation -
Landmark
Order by
 

 

Customs - High Court - Case Laws

Showing 1 to 20 of 6711 Records

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1261 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    Shah Nanji Nagsi Exports Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union of India, Ministry of Commerce & Industry and others

    Duty Free Import Authorization Scheme - issuance of the authorization - Held that - as they appear to have completed all the formalities for the issuance of the authorization and almost 17 such authorizations had been issued in favor of the petitioner on similar set of facts - since a strong prima facie case is made out by the petitioner, we direct the respondents to issue the necessary authorizations in favour of the petitioner only on the condi....... + More


  • 2018 (4) TMI 1259 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    Assistant Collector of Customs (M & P) Bombay Versus Shri Kashiram Laxman Karade C/o. Shah Rupchan Tarakcahnd, Shri Jayantilal Virchand Shah, State of Maharashtra

    Smuggling - Gold - It is the complainant s case that both the accused knowingly concerned in respect of said gold biscuits in the fraudulent evasion of duty chargeable thereon and prohibition imposed under Customs Act committed an offence punishable under Section 135(1)(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 - statements recorded under Section 108 were concluded - whether the statements were voluntary or were made under coercion - Held that - all panchanama....... + More


  • 2018 (4) TMI 1117 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    M/s. Kanpur Trading Co. Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Customs (Gr. 7H)

    Provisional release of goods - Section 110A of the Customs Act - petitioner claim that are these not prohibited and also no issues including issues pertaining to intellectual property rights pertains - Held that - the conditions imposed in the impugned order can be slightly modified - This is so because the goods, which are permitted for provisional release, have already been scrutinized by the Department and it appears that the except for the pr....... + More


  • 2018 (4) TMI 1053 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    The Principal Commissioner of Customs (General) Mumbai Versus Unison Clearing Pvt. Ltd., and others.

    Suspension of CHA License - Time Limitation - Whether the CESTAT is right in law in setting aside the order or suspension of the Custom Broker Licence on the ground of delay between the suspension and the notice of deviation or omission, ignoring that DRI letter dated 24th July 2014 and the Custom Broker Licence was suspended on 8th August 2014? - Regulation 18, Regulation 19 and Regulation 20 of CBLR. - Whether the time line as prescribed in Reg....... + More


  • 2018 (4) TMI 1052 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    The Commissioner Of Customs And The Commissioner Of Customs (Import And General) Versus SAP India Pvt. Ltd.

    Jurisdiction - power of DRI to issue SCN - tribunal remanded back the case - Whether CESTAT was justified and correct in law in passing an order of remand to the original adjudicating authority to first decide the issue of jurisdiction, after decision of the Supreme court in Civil Appeal preferred against the decision of Delhi High court in Mangli Impex Limited v. Union of India 2016 (5) TMI 225 - DELHI HIGH COURT ? - Held that - The appeals pref....... + More


  • 2018 (4) TMI 980 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    M/s. Shapoorji Pallonji Infrastructure Capital Co Ltd. Versus Union of India, The Director General, Directorate General of Safeguards, Customs and Central Excise

    Recommendation for Imposition of safeguard duty - import of Solar Cells - validity of preliminary findings notice - Maintainability of petition - Jurisdiction of High Court to entertain the petition - Principles of Natural Justice - Held that - it cannot be contended that this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the Writ Petition. The petitioner has also established that they are having their office at Chennai. Further, the respondents were no....... + More


  • 2018 (4) TMI 979 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    M/s. Welldone Exim Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As M/s. G.D. Mangalam Exim Pvt. Ltd.) , M/s. Attire Deisigners Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As M/s. Sidh Designers Pvt. Ltd.) , M/s. Goodone Traders Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As M/s. Yogmaya Traders Pvt. Ltd.) Versus Directorate General of Foreign Trade & Anr.

    Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) - Incremental Export Incentivisation Scheme (IEIS) - N/N. 43(RE-2013)/2009-2014 dated 25th September, 2013 - whether clause (i) incorporated in paragraph 3.14.5.(c) poses an upper limit of benefit under the IEIS for the year 2013-14 or in view of clause (ii), and on interpretation of paragraph 3.14.5.(c) claims in excess to this value would be subjected to greater scrutiny by the Regional Authority? - Held that - A Divi....... + More


  • 2018 (4) TMI 858 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    M/s. Priyanka Enterprises Versus The Joint Commissioner of Customs (Group 1) , The Deputy Commissioner of Customs (Group 1)

    Release of detained goods - waiver of detention and demurrage charges - Held that - the petitioner is entitled to issuance of certificate for waiver of detention and demurrage till it is released. In fact, such order has been passed by the Customs Authority and one such order dated 12.10.2017 passed by the Assistant Commissioner (DIU), Chennai -3 in favour of M/s. Far East Trading Establishment shows that the certificate has been given till the t....... + More


  • 2018 (4) TMI 857 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    Tecno Doors Pvt Ltd Versus The Commissioner of Customs

    Valuation - Contention of the appellant is that he had added freight amount of EURO 3900, being 20 of FOB value, to the invoice value, to arrive at the assessable value - Whether the Hon ble Tribunal has erred in directing the Commissioner of Customs, Appeals, to decide the case on merits, after only in the event if it is found that the assessable value was enhanced by the adjudicating Authority? - Held that - it is manifestly clear that where th....... + More


  • 2018 (4) TMI 686 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    Brio Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs (NS-III) SIIB (I) and Ors.

    Provisional release of goods - Jurisdiction - Held that - Merely because a point of jurisdiction is raised by the Petitioner, does not mean that the Competent Authority is automatically denuded of its power and Authority in law to adjudicate the show cause notice - All that would happen is that he will be obliged to render a finding on this preliminary objection of jurisdiction. - If the Revenue is unable to adjudicate the show cause notice and p....... + More


  • 2018 (4) TMI 685 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    M/s. Blessings Cargo Care Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Commissioner of Customs

    Maintainability of petition - alternative remedy of appeal - Held that - the Hon ble Supreme Court, as well as this Court, held that, ordinarily, writ petition should not be entertained when the Statutes provide for an effective and alternative remedy, more so, in revenue matters - where hierarchy of appeals is provided by the Statute, the party must exhaust the statutory remedies before resorting to writ jurisdiction. - Suspension of CHA License....... + More


  • 2018 (4) TMI 610 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    M/s. Raj Brothers Shipping Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Commissioner of Customs

    Maintainability of petition - Alternative remedy of appeal - Held that - On more than one occasion, Hon ble Supreme Court as well as this Court, held that when there is an effective and alternate remedy, provided under the taxing laws, writ petitions, should not be entertained. - The order of the writ Court made in W.P.No26435 of 2017 dated 10.10.2017, directing the appellant to avail the alternate remedy provided under the statute, cannot be sai....... + More


  • 2018 (4) TMI 493 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

    M/s GIVUDAN INDIA PVT. LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA, THE CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE & CUSTOMS, THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

    Extra Duty Deposit (EDD) - Board Circular No.4/2016 dated 9.2.2016 - Held that - the documents are submitted before the Respondent No.4 in terms of the Board Circular Nos. 4/2016 and 5/2016. - No extra EDD shall be charged from the petitioner-Company in terms of clause 2.2 of the Board Circular No.4/2016-Customs, on the petitioner-Company for the imports to be made by it from then onwards, without the specific leave of the Court. Petitioner is ha....... + More


  • 2018 (4) TMI 306 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

    M/s. Alufit (India) Pvt Ltd., Versus The Additional Commissioner of Customs

    Encashment of the Bank Guarantee - time limitation - Held that - this Court is of the opinion that normally such matters would not require any interference by this Court when it was open for the petitioner assessee Company to approach the concerned Tribunal itself with the prayer for interim relief as well soon after the service of the order upon them and there was no justification for it to have waited till the end of the limitation period, but ....... + More


  • 2018 (4) TMI 239 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    Anil Jain, M/s. Refex Industries Ltd, M/s. Sherisha Technologies Pvt Ltd Versus The Chief Commissioner of Customs, The Commissioner of Customs

    Maintainability of petition - alternative remedy of appeal - validity of second SCN for the same order in original - Held that - There cannot be two parallel proceedings assailing the correctness of the very same order-in-original, dated 23/9/2016. One before the Tribunal, by way of appeal, and another, by way of writ petitions, which may give rise to conflicting decisions - also, there is alternative remedy. - Appeal dismissed being not maintain....... + More


  • 2018 (4) TMI 238 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    M/s. Nandi Marketing Versus The Director General of Foreign Trade, The Commissioner of Customs, The Joint Commissioner of Customs (Group-6) , The Deputy Commissioner of Customs

    Validity of examination order of goods - N/N. 26/2015-2020 dated 01.09.2017 - the problem expressed by the importer/petitioner is that the cargo contains children toys and there are several varieties of children toys and if sample is drawn from each of the category of toys then it will be an expensive affair and totally unviable - Held that - respondent/department is permitted to draw representative samples, which shall not exceed 15 of each vari....... + More


  • 2018 (4) TMI 210 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    P. Bhaskar Naidu Versus The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, The Commissioner of Customs (Exports)

    Penalty - illegal export - Whether the appellant can be visited with penalty under section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962, on the stated cause (in the show cause notice) that the illegal export was attempted in the name of M/s. Archana Exports of which the appellant was the CEO? - Held that - as per Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962, that any person who, in relation to any goods, does not or omits to do any act which act or omission would render....... + More


  • 2018 (4) TMI 170 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    S.S. Offshore Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Union of India and Ors.

    Furnishing of Bank Guarantee - release of seized vessel - Held that - in the facts and circumstances of the case and only not to cause a breach of the contractual obligations as also to allow the petitioner to argue its case on merits as and when a show cause notice is issued, the seized vessel can be released. Each of these undertakings and reproduced are accepted as undertakings given to this court. In these circumstances, we modify the order o....... + More


  • 2018 (3) TMI 1561 - KERALA HIGH COURT

    M/s. Cargo Care International Versus Commissioner of Customs

    Suspension of CHA Licence - Regulation 19 of CBLR, 2013 - Time limitation - Held that - Regulation requires the Commissioner of Customs to issue notice in writing to the broker within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of an offence report and the Regulation does not contain any further provision in the event of its non compliance - Therefore, we are not persuaded to think that the 90 days period prescribed in Regulation 19(1) is one of....... + More


  • 2018 (3) TMI 1560 - KERALA HIGH COURT

    Commissioner of Customs Versus M/s. Parag Domestic Appliances

    Redemption of goods - violation of H&OW Rules, 2016 - import of Multi Function Devices being Digital Photocopiers and Printers - whether the imported goods would come under the definition of waste as per the H&OW Rules, 2016? - Whether Rule 15 of the H&OW rules is attracted? - Held that - the deeming fiction does not exclude the ordinary transactions which would come within the ambit of a sale or purchase of goods . Just as each sub-clause therei....... + More


1........
 
 
 
Recapitulation:

Recent / Latest:
Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 
 


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version