|
Advanced Search Options
Customs - High Court - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 7615 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.
- 2019 (9) TMI 598
Prayer of petitioner to be interrogated in the presence of an Advocate - service of notice u/s 108 of CA - HELD THAT:- The Supreme Court in the case of VIJAY SAJNANI & ANR. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ANR. [2012 (4) TMI 706 - SUPREME COURT] has directed that during interrogation of the petitioner(s), his/their counsel would be allowed to be present within visible distance, but beyond hearing range. The petitioner would be interrogated in presence of an advocate at a visible, but not audible distance in relation to the interrogation by the Officers of the DRI in accordance with the directions given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vijay Sajnani - it is also directed that the proceedings be video-graphed. Petition disposed off.
- 2019 (9) TMI 597
Permission to petitioner to have an advocate at visible but not audible distance during his interrogation by the Officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) - HELD THAT:- The Supreme Court in the case of VIJAY SAJNANI & ANR. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ANR. [2012 (4) TMI 706 - SUPREME COURT] has directed that during interrogation of the petitioner(s), his/their counsel would be allowed to be present within visible distance, but beyond hearing range. The petitioner would be interrogated in presence of an advocate at a visible, but not audible distance in relation to the interrogation - the proceedings directed to be video-graphed - petition disposed off.
- 2019 (9) TMI 478
Valuation of imported goods - rejection of declared value - alleged forgery of market enquiry - HELD THAT:- There is some element of truth in the contentions of the petitioners that the Market Inquiry Report dated 31.05.2012 (P-2) is possibly forged, however, we do not find it appropriate to decide the issue while exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. Further, the Tribunal consisting of two members (Member Judicial and Member Technical) would be quite competent to deal with all the issues raised by the petitioners for proper adjudication. It is also conceded that at present the Tribunal is available at Chandigarh, therefore, there seems to be no difficulty for the petitioners to approach the Tribunal. The petitioners are relegated to file their appeals before the CESTAT, Chandigarh and if the appeals are file....... + More
- 2019 (9) TMI 434
Detention of imported goods - Digital Multifunction Machines (DMM) - prohibited/restricted goods or not - non-compliance with the requirement of producing Extended Producers (EPR) certificate as per E-waste Management Rules (EMR), 2016 - case of petitioner is that the broad classification or entry under which the goods are imported comes under ‘restricted’ category but not ‘prohibited’ category? - section 110 of CA. HELD THAT:- The inspection of goods imported under the Bill of Entry has not been taken so far by the respondent. There is a serious dispute on whether the subject goods comes under ‘restricted’ category or ‘prohibited’ category under various Enactments, Rules and Regulations referred to above. This Court, without determination on the aspect by the authorities in accordance with ....... + More
- 2019 (9) TMI 433
Validity of Detention order - smuggling - Gold of Foreign Origin - confessions obtained under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT:- A perusal of grounds of detention and in particular paragraph 7 thereof, clearly reflects that, it is completely bereft of any material expressed therein for the Detaining Authority to arrive at the conclusion to the effect that ‘there is immediate possibility of your release from judicial custody’. Further, as is axiomatic from a reading of the same paragraph, the Detaining Authority was aware that the detenus were in judicial custody at the Presidency Correctional Home, Alipore, Kolkata, at the time of passing of the impugned order. In the absence of cogent material, the statement in the grounds of detention regarding the alleged imminent possibility of the detenus’ coming out....... + More
- 2019 (9) TMI 410
Validity of the approach of the the revenue officers to wait till the last day of the period of limitation and to decide whether to file an appeal or not at the last moment - Non-implementation or non-compliance of Ext.P11 final order - direction to respondent to issue detention certificate as per Regulation 6(1) of Handling of Cargo in Customs Area Regulation 2009 - waiver of demurrage charges from the Warehouse Corporation - suitable compensation for the alleged loss and damage suffered by the petitioner on account of depreciation value of subject goods and detaining the goods for unreasonable long period - defence of respondent is that there cannot be a direction to release or comply Ext.P11 final order before the period available for statutory remedy of appeal expires. HELD THAT:- This Court is constrained to observe that the responde....... + More
- 2019 (9) TMI 398
Advance Authorization Scheme - non-fulfilment of export obligation - supplies made to SEZ units - non-furnishing of bill of export - acceptance of Merchandise Export from India Scheme (MEIS) for issuance of MEIS scrip for the exports - exports made in 2015-16 and 2016-17 - It is the grievance of the Petitioner that after having held that the Petitioner has fulfilled the export obligation, the Additional Director General of Foreign Trade should have allowed the Petitioner’s appeal - HELD THAT:- In the present case, there is no dispute that Respondent No.3- Additional Director General of Foreign Trade who passed the impugned order was satisfied that the Petitioner has fulfilled the export obligation but he denied the benefit of export obligation to the Petitioner only on the ground of non-furnishing of bill of export. This view taken ....... + More
- 2019 (9) TMI 397
Imposition of penalty u/s 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 - redemption fine - classification of imported goods - import of Non Alloy material - Alleged mis- declaration of imported goods - whether the goods imported fell within Alloy Steel as per IS 7598:1900? - maintainability of appeal - appropriate forum - HELD THAT:- No question of law arises under Section 130 of the Act for consideration by this court - the Assessee ought to have approached the Departmental Authorities for waiver of the penalty and in such circumstances, in view of a very low and marginal difference of the chemical material (Boron) content in the goods imported and that too is one of several components and that other parameters as given in the Laboratory Report being within limit is not disputed by the learned counsel for the parties, would bring the commodity in que....... + More
- 2019 (9) TMI 364
Non-speaking order - order set aside on the ground of laches, since it was belatedly disposed without adhering to the time limit stipulated in the Circular of the Department - Circular No.732/48/2003-CX., dated 05.08.2003 - Classification of imported goods - pepper - case of the petitioner is that as per the four Bills of Entry, the importer has classified natural pepper under Tariff item 33021010 in two Bills of Entry and Tariff item 33021090 in the other two Bills of Entry - HELD THAT:- Since the respondent had not given the reasoning as to why these tariff items will not be applicable to the description of their product has not been specified in the impugned order, it would amount to a non-speaking order - It is no doubt true that the respondent had chosen to rely on Rule 2B of the General Rules by interpretation of the first schedule ....... + More
- 2019 (9) TMI 363
Principles of Natural Justice - Revocation of CHA License - imposition of penalty - objection of the petitioner to the impugned proceedings is that the show cause notice was not issued within 90 days of receipt of the offence report and that therefore the limitation prescribed in sub-regulation (1) of Regulation 20 was not adhered to - condition precedent under Regulation 20 (4) for considering the request of the Customs Broker for cross-examination - cross-examination of witnesses - violation of the principles of natural justice. HELD THAT:- There are conflicting views of different High Courts, with Madras and Delhi being on one side and Bombay and Calcutta being on another side, on the question whether the Regulation is mandatory or directory. Therefore, it is now necessary to go into the root of the matter. The vexed question as to whe....... + More
- 2019 (9) TMI 335
Grant of anticipatory bail - Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 - Smuggling - Gold - non-bailable warrants - HELD THAT:- There is no ground to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. As per the investigation conducted so far, it has come on record that on more than 04 occasions, the accused persons in conspiracy with each other has brought the gold in an illegal manner and the market value of the same is more than ₹ 1 crore making the offence as non-bailable, the allegations against the petitioner is that he is the main king-pin of the racket and is the Financer, who has provided 33000 U.S. Dollars to the co-accused for purchase of 01 Kg. gold and the same was brought from Dubai to Amritsar where it was seized. Considering the serious allegations against the petitioner, there is no ground to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner - petition dismissed.
- 2019 (9) TMI 249
Principles of Natural Justice - non-receipt of notice for personal hearing - Section 129 of the Customs Act, 1962 - case of the petitioner is that through Ext. P5, the petitioner has come to know that the second respondent has been authorised to act as adjudicating authority into the show cause notice issued to the petitioner - HELD THAT:- After juxtaposing the hearing dated 27. 07. 2019 referred to in Ext. P8 order and the reply given in the statement filed by the second respondent, prima facie this Court is of the view that the second respondent is unable to satisfactorily establish the service of notice of scheduled hearing on 27. 07. 2019 on petitioner or that the procedural safeguards are substantially complied with before passing the order in Ext. P8. The second respondent is not also proposing to establish its case that principles ....... + More
- 2019 (9) TMI 248
Release of detained goods - prohibited goods or not - import of Black Pepper - Matured Berries - detention on the ground that CIF value was not taken on the date of filing the Bill of Entry - benefit of N/N. 53/2015-2020 dated 21.03.2018 - HELD THAT:- The N/N. 53/2016-2020 dated 21.03.2018 issued by the Minister of Commerce and Industry, Department of Commerce, Directorate General of Foreign Trade clearly indicates that Black Pepper is entitled for free import, if the cost including freight is above ₹ 500/- per kg. - Perusal of the commercial invoice filed by the Petitioner dated 07.11.2018 clearly indicates that the transaction between the Petitioner and their seller for purchasing the Black Pepper measuring 14,000 kgs took place on 07.11.2018 and the total value of the said goods was arrived as USD95,900.00. It is not in dispute t....... + More
- 2019 (9) TMI 183
Demand of Interest - finalization of provisional assessment - petitioner had raised several objections substantiating that they were not liable to pay the demand amount, which were not considered - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- The demand notice dated 12.12.2012 is a single line demand, made without consideration of any of the objections raised by the petitioner. As a matter of fact, such demand in the year 2012, has been made on the action which came to be initiated way back in 1998. Originally, when the petitioner was summoned to participate in the enquiry in connection with levy of interest, on 23.11.2007, the petitioner had given various objections which was kept in abeyance unreasonably for more than five years - the second respondent seems to have reopened the issue on 09.01.2012, calling upon the petitioner to partici....... + More
- 2019 (9) TMI 139
Non-appearance in proceedings under Section 108 of Customs Act, 1962 - Section 174 and 175 of IPC - jurisdiction of officers working in the DRI at various levels - HELD THAT:- During the pendency of the present writ petition, the investigations have been transferred to the DRI Zonal Office, Ludhiana where the unit of the private company/petitioner no. 2 is situated and engaged in its business. It is submitted that in view of the conceded cooperation by the officers of the petitioner company in the pending investigations, the impugned complaint and summoning orders are required to be set aside as concededly the documents were furnished before the officials at Ahmedabad, however, it was the non-presence of the director which had actuated the initiation of the complaint. The DRI had sought time to seek instructions with regard to withdrawing....... + More
- 2019 (9) TMI 138
Valuation of goods - under-valuation and Hawala remittance - maintainability of appeal before the High Court - Sections 130(1) and 130 (E) of the Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT:- No appeal would lie to the High Court, where the cases involve any issue relating to rate of duty or value of goods for the purposes of assessment, and that, in all such cases, the assessee would have to move the Supreme Court, under Section 130(E). It appears that basically this appeal is challenging the valuation of the goods. So far as this challenge is concerned, the present appeal is not tenable in law. This appeal is dismissed on the ground of jurisdiction.
- 2019 (9) TMI 137
Personal presence of the petitioner as a witness through the authorised agent - Section 108(3) of the Customs Act - HELD THAT:- This Court is not inclined to accede to the plea of the petitioner that she has a statutory right to appear before the officer concerned as a witness through an authorised agent, in the facts of this case. However, Sri S. Manu, the Learned Central Government Counsel appearing for respondents 2 to 4, on instructions, would submit that since the petitioner is a woman, it shall be ensured that a woman Customs officer will be personally present throughout the questioning process of the petitioner by the officer concerned in pursuance of Ext. P2 summons - The said undertaking of the respondents made through the Central Government Counsel appearing for respondents 2 to 4 is recorded and it is ordered that respondents 2....... + More
- 2019 (9) TMI 136
100% EOU - Transfer of capital goods in question from their unit to the writ petitioner - satisfaction of condition of N/N. 52 of 2003, dated 31-3-2003 - Extension of time limit for installation of machinery - HELD THAT:- The said notification requires that in the case of capital goods they should have been installed or otherwise used within the unit within a period of one year from the date of import or procurement. Of course, the petitioner could have obtained extension of the time limit not exceeding 5 years. In this case, the petitioner did not obtain such an extension. Therefore, on account of the operation of the Clause 3(d)(1)(i) of Notification No. 52/2003, dated 31-3-2003, the petitioner came under a liability. It is true that this notification was later amended on 25-5-2015 vide Notification No. 34/2015. It is also true that the....... + More
- 2019 (9) TMI 83
Refusal to renew license - Redemption of advance authorization issued to the petitioner - Removal of deficiencies for the consideration of its application for revalidation of advance authorization - DRI’s contention is that it would complete the investigation within a period of 5 years from the concerned exports - HELD THAT:- There is no provision in the Act or the Rules that would entitle the DGFT to withhold the petitioner’s request indefinitely. Rule 7 of the Rules indicates that the DGFT may refuse to grant or renew the licences. However, the same has to be done by an order in writing and only for the reasons as stated therein. Thus, the DGFT may refuse to grant or renew the licence if it is of the view that any of the reasons as set out in Rule 7(1) of the Rules are established. And, he is required to pass an order specif....... + More
- 2019 (9) TMI 82
Proceedings against the officer of Customs - caused loss of customs duty and wrongful gain to the accused - Clearance of parcels as non-taxable articles in gross violation of the procedure for assessment and collections of custom duty - offences punishable under Sections 135(1)(a) and 136(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT:- A perusal of the private complaint indicates that the petitioner herein is sought to be prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 135(1)(a) and 136(1) of the Act on the charge that the petitioner entered into conspiracy with Accused No. 2 and in furtherance thereof, cleared parcels of dutiable computer parts without collecting the duty payable thereon and thereby caused extensive loss to the Customs Department and wrongful gain to the petitioner and other accused. The order passed by the Tribunal cle....... + More
........
|
