Appeal dismissed as vessel not liable for confiscation under Customs Act. Department permitted to proceed under different section. The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai was dismissed as the impugned vessel was found not liable for confiscation under Section 111(d) of ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Appeal dismissed as vessel not liable for confiscation under Customs Act. Department permitted to proceed under different section.
The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai was dismissed as the impugned vessel was found not liable for confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. The lower appellate authority permitted the department to proceed under a different sub-section of Section 111. The Tribunal deemed the appeal misconceived and upheld the decision of the lower authority.
The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai dismissed the appeal stating that the impugned vessel was not liable for confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. The lower appellate authority allowed the department to take action under any other sub-section of Section 111. The appeal before the Tribunal was deemed entirely misconceived and hence dismissed.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
