S.D. Overseas Vs Joint Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) Penalty u/s 114AA leviable in case of misdeclaration of the value of the imported goods as per the manufacturer’s price lists. Facts- The appellant had imported a consignment of Food Supplements through ICD, Tughlakabad and filed a Bill of Entry dated 04.01.2013 and the goods were […]
Anti-Dumping Appeal is allowed to the extent that the designated authority shall reexamine and give a fresh finding as to whether cessation of anti-dumping duty would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of injury so as to warrant imposition of anti-dumping duty for a further period of five years.
he appellant no doubt has filed Bill of Entry in the present case. But the same has been filed on the basis of material given to him by his client. He has expressed his bonafide and denied in-correctness of those documents. Merely because there is evidence on record to falsify the said statement, Customs Broker cannot be held liable for the penal action.
The law laid down in Calcutta Club is that a club and its members are one and the same and the club is formed for the purpose for mutual benefit of its members. Therefore, any amount paid by the members to the club and the services rendered by the club to its members are self service and cannot be taxed.
The law laid down in Calcutta Club is that a club and its members are one and the same and the club is formed for the purpose for mutual benefit of its members.
The Government has been simplifying the law and procedure relating to imports through courier from time to time. Accordingly, lot of trust and reliance has been placed on the courier agencies. A very clear procedure has been put in place by way of Courier Regulations to stream line the imports through Courier mode.
Charge of clandestine removal and duty evasion was a serious charge having civil consequences upon the assessee. Such charge could not be confirmed unless there was sufficient corroborative evidence which lead to the inevitable conclusion of clandestine removal and only on the basis of third party evidence the charge of clandestine removal was not sustainable.
KEC International Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise Central Goods & Service Tax (Appeals) (CESTAT Delhi) The CESTAT, New Delhi in M/s. KEC International Limited v. Commissioner of Central Excise and Central Goods & Service Tax (Appeals) [Excise Appeal No. 52907 of 2019 dated May 10, 2022] set aside the order passed by the Revenue […]
Ramvir Singh Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) CESTAT find that the appellant has received full set of documents through the freight forwarder and there was no reason for him to doubt the genuineness of the exporter. Further, as the goods were factory stuffed and sealed, the appellant – CHA has no reason to doubt […]
Vaibhav Global Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) This Tribunal in the case of CCE vs Western Electronics reported as 2000 (116) ELT 181 (Tri) while relying upon the similar circular as mentioned above has held that packing of the goods into different packs amounts to manufacture and while exporting such goods, the activity […]
