CESTAT Mumbai sets aside a ₹10 lakh penalty on S.A. Dalal & Co., a Customs House Agent, citing lack of investigation and statement recording.
CESTAT Kolkata sets aside penalty and vehicle confiscation for Vinod Kumar Agarwal, a transporter, citing lack of evidence of his knowledge in alleged smuggling of black pepper and arhar.
The CESTAT Delhi ruled that statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, are not valid evidence under Section 138B without proper examination.
CESTAT Hyderabad rules products like fatty acid, wax, and gums generated during rice bran oil refining are “waste” and qualify for excise duty exemption.
CESTAT Chennai rules against service tax on reimbursements received by Seamax Shipping India Pvt. Ltd. as a “pure agent,” citing Supreme Court precedent.
CESTAT Chandigarh rules imported goods’ value cannot be solely enhanced based on DRI alerts. It also confirms CVD exemption for polyester fabric, citing Supreme Court rulings.
CESTAT Delhi rules extended service tax limitation not valid when demand is based solely on income tax disclosures, citing lack of suppression.
CESTAT Chennai denies Amicus Communications’ customs duty refund appeal, citing failure to provide mandatory documents, lack of diligence, and strict compliance for exemptions.
The CESTAT Kolkata set aside a penalty in a gold smuggling case against a claimant, finding no documentary evidence of her involvement, despite upholding the gold’s confiscation.
CESTAT Hyderabad rules against extended limitation or penalty where excise clearance details were fully disclosed in ER-1 returns, remanding duty recalculation.
