1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Tribunal Upholds Cloves Confiscation, Overturns Seizure & Penalty Decision</h1> The Tribunal upheld the confiscation of 450 Kgs. of cloves but set aside the confiscation of goods seized from M/s. Rajasthan Corporation and the penalty ... Confiscation and penalty Issues:1. Confiscation of goods seized from the premises of M/s. Rajasthan Corporation2. Penalty imposed on Shri Shanker Lal under Section 112 of the Customs ActConfiscation of Goods Seized from M/s. Rajasthan Corporation:The Customs officers seized various foreign origin goods from the premises of M/s. Rajasthan Corporation, including cloves, small cardamom, Javitri, Badam, Dalchini, and Chiraunji. The Deputy Commissioner of Customs ordered the absolute confiscation of some goods and allowed redemption on a fine for others. The Commissioner (Appeals) reduced the fine and penalty imposed on Shri Shanker Lal. The appellants argued that while the goods seized were of foreign origin, they were not notified goods, and the Customs authorities failed to prove illicit importation. They referenced a Board circular and Tribunal decisions emphasizing the need for Customs to establish illicit importation for confiscation. The Commissioner (Appeals) noted the lack of evidence supporting the goods' smuggled nature and their availability in the Indian market. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the confiscation of goods seized from M/s. Rajasthan Corporation and the penalty imposed on Shri Shanker Lal.Penalty Imposed on Shri Shanker Lal:The appellants contended that the Customs authorities did not provide evidence of illicit importation of the seized goods from M/s. Rajasthan Corporation, as required by a Board circular and Tribunal decisions. The Revenue argued that bills presented by the appellants were outdated and not related to the disputed goods. However, since the Customs did not establish illicit importation, the Tribunal upheld the appellants' argument and set aside the penalty imposed on Shri Shanker Lal under Section 112 of the Customs Act.In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the confiscation of 450 Kgs. of cloves but set aside the confiscation of goods seized from M/s. Rajasthan Corporation and the penalty imposed on Shri Shanker Lal. The decision was based on the Customs authorities' failure to prove illicit importation of the goods, as required by legal standards and precedents.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
