1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Tribunal upholds penalties for exporting without permit under Customs Act</h1> The Tribunal upheld the confiscation of goods and imposition of penalties under Sections 113(g) and 114(iii) of the Customs Act for exporting goods ... - Issues involved: Breach of provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 regarding export of goods without Let Export Order (LEO) and imposition of penalty under Sections 113(g) and 114(iii) of the Customs Act.Summary:1. The appeals and stay applications were filed against an Order-in-Original passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Export), Nhava Sheva, regarding the export of goods without obtaining the Let Export Order (LEO) from the customs authority. 2. The appellants, a shipping agency and an exporter, exported goods without the LEO, resulting in a notice for breach of Customs Act provisions. The goods were held liable for confiscation under Section 113(g) and penalties were imposed under Section 114(iii). The appellants contended that the loading was done early due to the goods being over dimensional, and they were not responsible for the sailing of the vessel before LEO was granted.3. The Customs Act imposes responsibilities on exporters and their agents to ensure completion of export formalities before goods are exported. The vessel sailed before LEO was granted, leading to a breach of Customs Act provisions. The penalties imposed on the appellants were deemed justified as any act or omission making goods liable for confiscation attracts penalty under Section 114(iii).4. The Tribunal upheld the confiscation of goods and imposition of penalties, citing precedents where actions leading to goods being exported without LEO rendered them liable for confiscation and penalties. The only consideration was whether the penalties imposed were excessive. The penalty amounts were reduced to &8377; 1.4 lakhs for the exporter and &8377; 1.6 lakhs for the shipping agency, while upholding the lower authority's order. Stay applications were also disposed of.