CESTAT Chennai held that duty demand due to non-fulfilment of export obligation justified as department empower to recover escaped duty when post importation conditions are not fulfilled. Accordingly, appeal dismissed.
CESTAT Allahabad held that amendment of bill of entry under section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 for claiming benefit of duty exemption certificate received after clearance of goods allowed. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that benefit of exemption from additional duty of customs i.e. benefit of notification no. 43/2002-Cus dated 19.04.2002 available on import of High Speed Diesel even if they are working under DEEC Scheme.
The alleged misdeclaration in the year of manufacture of the machinery to be imported by the appellant to the Directorate General of Foreign Trade ( DGFT ) did not fall within the purview of Section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962.
CESTAT Bangalore held that imported coco beans which didn’t satisfied the quality standards were permitted to re-export and accordingly, redemption fine and penalty imposed on the same reduced.
CESTAT Chennai held that order suspending CHA License set aside since proof regarding violation of Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2018 [CBLR] not available. Thus allegation not proved and hence CHA License restored.
Assessee was working under Notification No.56/2002-CE dated 14.11.2002 which provides for exemption from the duty of excise to specified goods cleared from industrial units in the State of Jammu & Kashmir to the extent of duty paid in cash by way of a refund mechanism, for a period of ten years from the date of publication of the notification or from the date of commencement of commercial production, whichever is later. During the scrutiny of ER-1 Returns
CESTAT Delhi held that goods are liable for confiscation u/s. 111(m) of the Customs Act 1962 since goods are mis-declared with intention to evade imposition of anti-dumping duty under notification no. 51/2012-CUS(ADD) dated 03.12.2012. Further, penalty also imposed u/s. 114(A) of the Customs Act.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that under Customs Act interest on sanctioned refund is admissible after three months from the date of application and not from date of Commissioner (A) order.
Book entry/manner of book keeping cannot lead to demand of service tax; (ii) recoupment/booking of costs between two divisions of the same company cannot amount to provision of service as there is no service provider and no service receiver;
