CESTAT Chennai rules against arbitrary rejection of declared import value, citing SC precedent in valuation dispute.
CESTAT Chennai sets aside the order in SLV Trading Co. case, remanding it for reconsideration of judicial precedents on redemption fine and penalties.
CESTAT Kolkata lowers SAIL’s customs penalty from ₹44 lakh to ₹2.25 lakh for delayed document filing in provisional assessments under Regulation 5.
CESTAT Mumbai overturns order revoking Sarajdeep Logistics’ customs broker license, citing insufficient evidence and reliance on inadmissible statements.
CESTAT Delhi held that regulation 10(n) doesn’t mandate Customs Broker to verify correctness of certificate or registration issued by other concerned government officer. Thus, revocation of customs broker licence and forfeiture of security deposit are set aside.
CESTAT Chennai held that ‘Receiver’ being part of the phone is classifiable under CTH 8517. Thus, classification sought to be made by the Revenue under CTH 8518 lacks merit and hence, order is set aside.
CESTAT Kolkata sets aside customs duty order as authorities failed to provide test reports. Case remanded for fresh adjudication following natural justice principles.
CESTAT Chennai held that Epoxidised Soya Bean Oil is classifiable under tariff heading 1518 0039 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1985. Accordingly, duty demand of normal period with appropriate interest confirmed.
CESTAT Delhi held that responsibility of the Customs Broker under Regulation 10(n) does not include keeping a continuous surveillance on the client. Thus, customs broker cannot be held responsible if client moves to new premises and doesn’t inform authorities.
CESTAT Delhi held that FOB value is the transaction value and customs officer has no right to interfere/ modify the FOB value of the goods. Thus, appeal of exporter’s allowed and order set aside.
