The appellants herein is a Customs Broker (CB). In pursuance of specific intelligence regarding customs duty evasion in import consignment CFS was put on hold and further investigation ware carried out.
Classification cannot be changed merely because 8 digit classification has been introduced, CESTAT sets aside demand of differential duty along with penalties
CESTAT Mumbai set aside CENVAT Credit denial for Mangal Singh Bros., ruling that duty acceptance on final products justifies credit claim.
CESTAT Mumbai quashes ₹1,00,000 penalty on co-noticee under Section 112(b) of Customs Act, citing lack of evidence linking him to DEEC scheme violations. Read full order.
Damodar Nayak Vs Commissioner of Customs (Export Promotion) (CESTAT Mumbai) Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) restored an appeal after two years, observing that the appellant was not served with a notice of the final hearing due to an incorrect address provided by the previous advocate. The tribunal noted that the earlier counsel […]
The said SCN was adjudicated by the learned Commissioner of Customs in the impugned order by confirming the proposals made in the SCN. Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order, the appellants have filed these appeals before the Tribunal.
Section 27 of Customs Act, which specifies that limitation period for refunds must be calculated from date of reassessment, not from initial filing of bills of entry.
BPCL challenges the Central Excise classification of propylene, seeking relief against the differential duty imposed by the authorities.
CESTAT Mumbai sets aside service tax demand against Konkan Railway for excess Cenvat credit adjustment due to unutilized credit under CGST Act, 2017.
CESTAT Mumbai held that allegation of mis-declaration and duty demand thereon not sustained as department doesn’t challenged transaction value. Further, importer duly mentioned value of all the imported goods in the invoice. Hence, duty demand not sustained.
