Case Law Details
Shri Imran Ahmed Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Allahabad)
Appellants are located in Special Economic Zone and having a license to import the impugned goods. Therefore, relying on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Morgan Tectronics Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi [2015 (316) E.L.T. 276 (Tri.-Del.)], wherein the Tribunal has observed as under:-
“8. Moreover, in terms of the Section 53(1) of the SEZ Act, 2005, the SEZ is deemed to be territory outside the Customs Territory of India, and the goods imported were meant for the unit in SEZ Noida. In our view, the Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo, New Customs House, New Delhi had no jurisdiction to confiscate these goods and impose penalty on the appellant and it is only the joint/Dy. Commissioner/Asstt. Commissioner of Customs, in Noida SEZ unit, who had the jurisdiction to take necessary action. For this reason also, the impugned orders are not sustainable.”
We hold that the Customs officers have no jurisdiction on the appellant to seize the goods in S.E.Z. area therefore seizure of the goods in question is set aside. Consequently, no demand can be confirmed against the appellants. Therefore the confiscation of the impugned goods is also set aside.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT JUDGMENT
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
