CESTAT Delhi held that communication modules being parts of communication hubs is classifiable under CTI 8517 70 90. Accordingly, differential duty and also interest and imposition of penalty u/s. 114A set aside.
CESTAT Delhi held that as per section 45 of the Customs Act, 1962, being the custodian of imported goods, appellant was burdened with the responsibility of safe custody of the imported goods.
CESTAT Delhi remands LG TV panel undervaluation case for review. Customs to verify import data authenticity and reassess valuation per applicable rules.
CESTAT Delhi confirms no penalty for Sarang Wadhawan under Customs Act Section 114AA, finding no false declaration in the import of an aircraft.
Goods (tyres) imported by assessee was without any BIS markings being in violation of the statutory provisions were not permissible to be imported, and hence they were liable for confiscation under Section 111 of the Customs Act.
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 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.
Nokia India Pvt. Ltd. faced a service tax demand for short payments, penalties, and CENVAT credit issues during the period 2003–2007. CESTAT ruling clarified the matter.
CESTAT Delhi rules in favor of Ambuja Cements, allowing CENVAT credit for service tax on GTA services used to transport goods to buyers on FOR basis.
CESTAT Delhi held that import of ‘hCG Pregnancy Rapid Test Strip’ and ‘hCG Pregnancy Rapid Test Cassette’ i.e. pregnancy detection kits based on ‘agglutinating sera’ are eligible for exemption notification. Accordingly, customs duty not leviable on the same.
