CESTAT Mumbai held that consignment of steam coal imports from Indonesia is not overvalued and the scheme of valuation does not stand in support of the manner in which the value has been sought to be substituted in the notice. Accordingly, present appeals are dismissed.
The Tribunal held that the prohibition order no longer had effect because the broker’s Mumbai registration expired, rendering the appeal infructuous. With no surviving cause of action, the order required no interference.
The CESTAT Mumbai allowed an appeal against customs duty reassessment, holding that reclassification of copper busbars for EOU imports exceeded authorities’ jurisdiction and violated notification provisions.
CESTAT Mumbai held that MIMO-based Wi-Fi extenders qualify for exemption under customs notification, clarifying that exclusion applies only to products combining MIMO and LTE technologies.
CESTAT Mumbai rules that mis-declaration under the Foreign Trade Policy cannot attract penalty under Section 117 of the Customs Act and allows Ajanta Pharma’s appeal.
The CESTAT Mumbai ruled that confiscation, fine, and penalty cannot be imposed on IGST demand arising from breach of pre-import conditions under the Advance Authorization Scheme.
The Tribunal ruled that refund limitation under Section 27 does not apply to bank guarantees encashed during pending appeals and ordered customs to refund the encashed amount.
The issue was whether customs could deny AIFTA duty exemption for ten consignments based only on irregularities found in a separate, single import. The CESTAT set aside the duty demand, holding that the exemption cannot be denied without a finding on the authenticity or validity of the individual Certificate of Origin (COO).
CESTAT Mumbai set aside a ₹1 lakh penalty on a Custom House Agent (CHA), ruling that mere classification disputes are not grounds for confiscation or penalty.
CESTAT Mumbai set aside an order that rejected an exporter’s supplementary claim for Swatch Bharat Cess (SBC) refund. The Tribunal ruled that Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules has no bar on filing multiple refund claims for the same period.
