CESTAT Chennai held that when the benefit of an exemption Notification is claimed, the claimant has to necessarily fulfil all the conditions prescribed under the said beneficial Notification.
CESTAT Chennai ruled that Volvo can import internal combustion engines under DFIA license without restrictions to tractor-related parts.
Flextronics Technologies India Private Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai) In the case of Flextronics Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. vs Commissioner of Customs, CESTAT Chennai examined the classification and duty exemption of connectors imported by the appellant. Flextronics filed an appeal against an order by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals-I), Chennai, which upheld the […]
CESTAT Chennai held that the Investigation Report is administrative and fact finding in nature as it does not purport to decide the lis or contest between the contending parties by a statutory authority. Thus, investigation report is not appealable order.
CESTAT Chennai held that benefit of Basic Customs Duty BCD under notification no. 25/2005 eligible in case of import of ‘Digital Still Image Video Cameras’. Accordingly, appeal allowed with consequential benefits.
Refund of Extra Duty Deposit ( EDD ) was not subject to the limitation under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962, and should be returned upon finalization of provisional assessments without requiring a formal refund claim.
In the order above mentioned CESTAT allowed appeal of the assessee and held that that closure letter was already issued by the authority.
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 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.
CESTAT sets aside the rejection of refund claim in Shriram Impex case, citing failure to consider Chartered Accountant certificate for SAD paid.
