Advanced Search Options
Landmark Cases - Customs - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 3604 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.
- 2020 (1) TMI 503
Smuggling - foreign currency - retraction of statements relied upon - prosecution of accused person - Section 137(1) of the Customs Act - HELD THAT:- On perusal of deposition of PW 1 and PW 2, it has come on record that no incriminating material was found either on the person of the accused no.2 or from his baggage. The only material is sought to be relied upon is his statement recorded on 24th March 1996 which is subsequently retracted. The Appeal is premised on the ground that the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has failed to accord any weightage to the said statement wherein the accused has confessed that he had met one Gurmit Singh and he acted as a carrier for smuggling the foreign currency and he also agreed to accompany the accused no.1 who was to act as a carrier to ensure the safe delivery of the foreign currency at Dubai. ....... + More
- 2019 (10) TMI 642
Recovery of duty drawback incentive availed at the time of export - power to reassess shipping bill - Rule 16 of the Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995 - Free on Board (FOB) value of the goods exported during 2007-08 to 2012-13 rejected - definition of ‘export goods’ - application of Valuation Rules, 2007 to exported goods. HELD THAT:- It is apparent from the definition of ‘export goods’ that the goods which have already been taken out of India do not remain export goods instead are referable as exported goods. The definition of ‘imported goods’ makes things more than clear that goods which have already been cleared are not “imported goods”. Similarly, goods which have already been exported are no more ‘export goods’. In the definition part as wel....... + More
- 2019 (9) TMI 1283
Smuggling - Betel Nuts - Provisional release of seized goods - N/N. 9/96 (NT) - Cus, dated 22.01.96 issued under Section 11 of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Section 3(2) of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 - HELD THAT:- In the present case, since the Food Laboratory Report has found that the Betel Nut are not fit for human consumption, in the opinion of this Court, no fault may be found with the rejection of the request of the petitioners for grant of release. Sustainability of seizure - Learned counsel for the Union of India, Department of Customs has submitted that the developments so far may persuade this Court not to interfere with the seizure at this stage when the matter is still under investigation and a complete view may be taken as regards the foreign origin after obtaining a report from the accredited l....... + More
- 2019 (9) TMI 970
Recovery of erroneous Duty Drawback - Rule 16 of the Drawback Rules, 1995 - rejection of value declared in the shipping bills after completion of export - self assessment - extended period of limitation - power to reject already assessed value of goods which stand exported. Whether writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable against impugned show cause notice dated 9.2.2018? - HELD THAT:- All the questions raised by Petitioner are question of jurisdiction, we find it appropriate to entertain present writ Petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India and accordingly proceed to answer other questions. Whether demand of duty drawback under Rule 16 of the Drawback Rules, 1995 can be made without any reasonable period of limitation? - HELD THAT:- Notice has been issued under Rule 16 and not 16A of Drawback Rules, 1995 so it is ad....... + More
- 2019 (9) TMI 802
Maintainability of Refund claim - order of assessment in appeal not challenged - whether in the absence of any challenge to the order of assessment in appeal, any refund application against the assessed duty can be entertained? Whether in the case of self-assessment without passing a speaking order, it can be termed to be an order of self-assessment? - HELD THAT:- In Escorts Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors. [ 1994 (2) TMI 74 - SUPREME COURT ] the question arose for consideration as to the Bill of Entry classifying the imported goods under a certain tariff item and paying the duty thereon. This Court held that in such a case signing of the bill of entry itself amounted to passing an order of assessment. Hence, the application seeking a refund on the ground that imported goods fell under a different item attracting a far lower rate of duty....... + More
- 2019 (5) TMI 169
Import of restricted item - Old and Used Digital Multifunction Print and Copying Machines - requirement of production of authorisation/import licence issued by the DGFT authorities or any other notification or clarification issued by the DGFT - HELD THAT:- The goods imported by the respondent/writ petitioner are second hand machinery. In terms of the policy guidelines issued by the DGFT, authorisation/import licence ought to have been obtained, as the goods are restricted for import in terms of Para 2.31 of the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-20. The respondent/writ petitioner was fully aware of the fact and that an import licence and appropriate BIS clearance certificate under the relevant order is a prerequisite and having been well acquainted with the legal position, they have applied for grant of such licence which was either rejected or no....... + More
- 2019 (4) TMI 257
Maintainability of petition - alternative remedy of appeal - Valuation of export goods - fabrics and ready-made garments - exports made in proxy dummy - inflated export value so as to avail undue and otherwise inadmissible export benefits advantage - rejection of declared FOB value - Held that:- This Court is not commenting upon the issue and upon the findings given by the learned Commissioner, as the petitioner is having an alternative remedy of preferring an appeal before the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal - This Court is of the opinion that as the order has been passed by an authority competent under the statute to pass an order and as the order has been passed after hearing the petitioner in detail, the present petition deserves to be dismissed on the ground of availability of alternative equally efficacious remedy. No case for interference is made out in the matter - petition dismissed.
- 2019 (4) TMI 146
Issuance of DFIA licence - petitioner's entitlement for importing maize popcorn vide SION entry as E75 under DFIA scheme - export of maize starch powder under DFIA scheme - actual user condition - whether petitioner can be allowed to import maize popcorn against DFIA licence for export of starch powder under SION entry No. E75 when admittedly imported popcorn is not used to manufacture export product namely maize starch powder? Held that:- The scheme itself is of transferable authorisation and therefore in that context different interpretation cannot be made. Moreover, Clause 4.27(iv) conveys that wherever SION prescribes 'Actual User' condition, it will prevail. Herein, no such actual user condition is specifically prescribed by SION for relevant entry. Chapter 9 of the FTP 2015 20 specifically defines the term 'act....... + More
- 2019 (3) TMI 312
Relevant date of imports for the purpose of FTP - Whether the relevant date for the reckoning the date of the imports would be the date of Bill of Lading or Bill of Entry? - Held that:- Regulation 9.11 of the Foreign Trade Policy specifically states that for the purpose of reckoning the date of import, the relevant date would be the date of Bill of Lading only. In the light of the aforesaid the Foreign Trade Policy being a complete code by itself, reference by the learned counsels for the Revenue to section 15 of the Customs Act, which fixes the date for determination of rate of duty and tariff for the purpose of valuation of imported goods as the date of Bill of Entry, may not be relevant - the relevant date for reckoning the import of the consignments of peas is the date of Bill of Lading. The grant of stay of operation of the relevant ....... + More
- 2019 (3) TMI 293
Jurisdiction - authority of Director General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) to exercise powers u/s 3 of the Act - converting certain items from “free” to “restricted” - delegation of power - Held that:- SLP is dismissed.
- 2019 (2) TMI 1659
Demand of duty on the enhanced value - Detention of goods - HELD THAT:- Petitioners are directed to pay the duty applicable on the enhanced value, as determined by the Chartered Engineer. On payment of the same, goods detained in the Custom Fleet Stations, licensed by the Customs, be released. Till the date of release of goods, demurrage charges be waived.
- 2019 (2) TMI 1628
Prohibition on sale and distribution of cigarettes and other tobacco product manufactured by Indian manufacturers and suppliers - prohibition on duty free shops - benefit of section 32 of the COTPA - scope of 'Exports' - HELD THAT:- Respondent No.2 while selling the goods from its duty free shops at departure terminal hold themselves as exporters of the goods and therefore it falls under the ambit of “exporter” as defined in section 2(20) of the Customs Act, 1962. Applying the definition provided in the Customs Act, in this context, the goods supplied to the duty free shops by the Indian and international manufacturers / suppliers are 'exported goods', and on reading this definition in conjunction with the definitions of exporter, it is clear that the duty free shop operator is the “exporter” and th....... + More
- 2019 (2) TMI 1625
Restoration of Appeal - assessee raised a preliminary objection on the ground that since there is an order of Settlement Commission qua the main Noticee and three other Co-noticees, there cannot be the adjudication, any further, with respect to remaining co-noticees - HELD THAT:- Before the Settlement Commission, the main co-noticee made an appropriate declaration with respect to its liability. The Commission after accepting the said declaration passed the order under Section 19 (1) of Finance (II) Act, 1998 directing the main co-noticee to pay an amount of ₹ 5,50,090/-. The said amount undisputedly stands paid. The immunity to the said co-noticee and 3 of his employees was given in view of the aforesaid acknowledgement of liability on their part. From the grounds of appeal also there is no other submission of the applicant - appell....... + More
- 2019 (2) TMI 1445
Validity of Pre-import conditions - Exemption from integrated tax and GST compensation cess - benefit of N/N. 18/2015- Cus - Import against Advance Authorisation - Duty Exemption/Remission Schemes - pre-import conditions - principal challenge in these petitions is to the “preimport condition” in paragraph 4.14 of the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-2020 inserted vide Notification No.33/2015-2020 dated 13.10.2017 and such “pre-import condition” introduced by clause (xii) in Notification No.18/2015-Customs by virtue of Notification No.79/2017-Customs dated 13.10.2017. Held that:- Considering the interpretation of the condition of physical export and pre-import put forth by the DRI, it is more or less impossible to make any exports under an Advance Authorisation without violating the condition of pre-import. In effect and s....... + More
- 2019 (2) TMI 1375
Extension of the date for issuing show cause notice after detention/seizure of the goods - appellant submits that in this case, the appellant were not issued the Show Cause Notice and given opportunity to be heard before extending the time limit for issuance of Show Cause Noptice under provisions of Customs Act - whether after the amendment of Section 110(2) of Customs Act by Finance Act, 2018 is there any need for issuance of the Show Cause Notice before the extension is permitted by another six months on the reasonable ground by the Commissioner/adjudicating authority? - Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962. Held that:- Clause 90 of the Bill seeks, to amend Section 110 of the Customs Act so as to give power to extend the period for issuing Show Cause Notice in case of seized goods by a further period of six months to case in cases where....... + More
- 2019 (2) TMI 1187
Amendment in shipping bills - Benefit under Merchandise Exports from India Scheme (MEIS) - petitioner inadvertently opted for “No” instead of “Yes” in the shipping bills - Corrections to be made is denied on the ground that now the EDI system is being followed and not manual system is in place - Held that:- Identical issue decided in the case of SAINT GOBAIN INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA [2018 (11) TMI 536 - KERALA HIGH COURT], where it was held that petitioner shall produce the said NOC before the 4th respondent and seek the benefits from the 4th respondent. In the present case also, the second respondent can be directed to issue N.O.C. to enable the petitioner to avail the benefit from the third respondent - petition allowed.
- 2019 (1) TMI 1633
Release of seized goods - Betel Nuts - the consignment of the petitioner is said to have been put under seizure alleging that the same seems to be of 'Indonesian Origin' - allegation based on test report of Arecanut Research and Development Foundation, Mangalore - HELD THAT:- This court is of the opinion that in absence of there being a standardized laboratory test for tracing the country of origin, established under some statute and such Labs have been accredited by the competent authority and the Labs could have the scientific method to come to a conclusion that a Betel Nut is of a particular country's origin, it would not be in the interest of justice to direct the petitioner to pay the custom's duty. Revenue submits that in fact on the basis of materials which are available on the record, in his opinion now the time ha....... + More
- 2019 (1) TMI 1542
Requirement of pre-deposit as a condition for the hearing and disposal of the appeal - section 129E of CA - Held that:- The petitioner’s appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) shall be heard on its merits without insisting upon the requirement of pre-deposit; it is accordingly directed to be waived. In case the petitioner files his appeal within four weeks, the same shall be considered on its merits without pre-deposit and shall not be dismissed on the ground of limitation - petition disposed off.
- 2019 (1) TMI 1541
Mandatory pre-deposit for maintainability of an appeal - Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962 - Held that:- The appellant is not interested in pursuing the appeal as he has not even sought time to make the pre-deposit - appeal dismissed.
- 2019 (1) TMI 1324
Detention of imported item - prohibited goods or not? - import of Multi-Function Devices (Digital Photocopiers and Printers) - violation of the Foreign Trade Policy, 20152020 framed under Sections 3 and 5 of the Foreign Trade Act and the Wastes Management Rules - penultimate direction for deposit of Bond without sureties - Held that:- Indisputably, the respondents did not possess the necessary authorisation for their import. The customs authorities therefore prima facie cannot be said to be unjustified in detaining the consignment. Merely because earlier on more than one occasion, similar consignments of the respondent or others may have been cleared by the customs authorities at the Calcutta, Chennai or Cochin ports on payment of redemption fine cannot be a justification simpliciter to demand parity of treatment for the present consign....... + More