Custom Duty judiciary-2

Non-compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act, 1985

Sikodh Mahto Vs. State (Delhi High Court)

The Hon­­'ble High Court of Delhi vide Judgment dated 6th June, 2019 passed in Crl. A. No.660/2017 titled Sikodh Mahto vs. State and in  Crl No.698/2017 titled Prabhu  Mahto vs. State while quashing the order passed by Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, acquitted the appellants in case involving alleged seizure  of contraband (Charas w...

Read More

Govt can retain excess auction sale proceeds of confiscated goods: SC

Gillette India Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Under Sections 125 read with Section 126 of the Customs Act, 1962 where the redemption fine in lieu of confiscation is not paid within the time stipulated, the Central Government is entitled to retain the excess auction sale proceeds of the confiscated goods, after adjustment of the duty, penalty, interest and other statutory dues. ...

Read More

Recovery of interest without issuance of notice is bad in law: CESTAT Mumbai

M/s. Ansar & Co. Vs Commissioner of Customs (Imp-II) (CESTAT Mumbai)

The assessee should have been put to Notice and a reasonable opportunity should have been given for representing their case. While the same was not done, jumping straight way to coercive measures was certainly uncalled for. Therefore, Interest collected being without authority of Law needs to be refunded along with applicable interest....

Read More

Arrest by DGCEI without SCN is Unconstitutional: SC

Union of India & Ors. Vs Ms. Make My Trip (India) Pvt. Ltd. (Supreme Court)

Union of India & Ors. Vs Ms. Make My Trip (India) Pvt. Ltd. (Supreme Court) The issue is as to whether the power of arrest under Section 91 of the Finance Act, 1994 can be exercised without following the procedure as set out in Section 73A(3) and (4) of the said Act. The High Court […]...

Read More

CESTAT upheld Order sanctioning refund after rectifying clerical mistakes in shipping bills

Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax Vs M/s Mideast Integrated Steels Ltd. (CESTAT Hyderabad)

Order sanctioning refund by the first appellate authority (FAA) was upheld after rectifying the clerical/ arithmetical mistakes in the shipping bills....

Read More

CESTAT upholds Penalty on CHA Company & Director for not following KYC Norms

HLPL Global Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Vs CC, New Delhi (CESTAT Delhi)

HLPL Global Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Vs CC, New Delhi (CESTAT Delhi) We are in agreement with the finding of the ld. Adjudicating authority that CHA helps not properly verified the functioning of the client from at the declared address by using reliable independent and authenticate documents. This was a serious lapse on part of the […]...

Read More

File tax appeals before the bench allotted to district where dispute arose

Dixons Cargo Consolidators Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (High Court Bombay)

Dixons Cargo Consolidators Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner Of Customs (High Court Bombay) The impugned orders passed by the Tribunal in excise appeals before us relate to and arise out of disputes relating to manufacture of excisable goods which have taken place at Nagpur. Therefore, the Excise Appeal Nos. 28 of 2017 and 105 of 2017 before [&h...

Read More

Goods cannot be treated as Smuggled for mere non-maintenance of books

Union of India Vs Imtiaz Iqbal Pothiwala (Bombay High Court)

UOI Vs Imtiaz Iqbal Pothiwala (Bombay High Court) We are of the view that in the absence of evidence in the form of regular Books of Account, Registration under the Income Tax and Sales Tax, etc., cannot ispo­facto lead to the conclusion that the seized gold bars, are smuggled gold bars. These may lead to proceedings for […]...

Read More

AO cannot reject transaction value declared in Bills of Entry without giving reasons: SC

Commissioner Of Central Excise And Service Tax Vs M/S. Sanjivani Non-Ferrous Trading Pvt. Ltd. (Supreme Court of India)

Commissioner Of Central Excise And Service Tax Vs M/S. Sanjivani Non-Ferrous Trading Pvt. Ltd. (Supreme Court of India) Original Authority in its Order-in-Original dated 25/03/2015 passed comments on the ground of writ petition and did not properly examine the evidence available with the department required to be examined for enhancement ...

Read More
Posted Under: Custom Duty |

Highly technical equipment cannot be differentiated into smaller parts

Hindustan Aeronaurics ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Bangalore)

Hindustan Aeronaurics Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Bangalore) It is evident by the submissions of the appellant that the impugned part is not only a mere sting or wire or rope but is part of A90B100 which consists of other units. It was not correct on the part of the department to isolate a minor part […]...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (4,153)
Company Law (4,744)
Custom Duty (7,289)
DGFT (3,932)
Excise Duty (4,195)
Fema / RBI (3,699)
Finance (3,896)
Income Tax (29,941)
SEBI (3,137)
Service Tax (3,452)