Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2011 (3) TMI 315 - HC - Customs

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Court upholds order for Rs. 30 crore pre-deposit, dismisses challenge on imported car kit value The High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing a pre-deposit of Rs. 30 crores, dismissing the petitioner's arguments challenging the inclusion 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.

                            Court upholds order for Rs. 30 crore pre-deposit, dismisses challenge on imported car kit value

                            The High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing a pre-deposit of Rs. 30 crores, dismissing the petitioner's arguments challenging the inclusion of US$ 45 million in the value of imported car kits, financial hardship, provisional assessment, and credit of CVD. The Court found no merit in the petitioner's contentions and extended the deposit deadline by six weeks.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Legality of the pre-deposit order by the CESTAT.
                            2. Inclusion of US$ 45 million in the value of imported car kits.
                            3. Financial hardship and pre-deposit amount.
                            4. Provisional assessment and credit of CVD.

                            Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Legality of the pre-deposit order by the CESTAT:
                            The petitioner challenged the CESTAT's order dated 12-05-2010, which directed a pre-deposit of Rs. 30,00,00,000/- for entertaining an appeal against the order-in-original dated 04-03-2009. The petitioner argued that the GATT valuation cell had previously determined that the US$ 45 million paid to Skoda was not related to the value of the car kits imported. The Tribunal, however, found prima facie evidence suggesting that the payment was intended to evade customs duty, thus justifying the pre-deposit order.

                            2. Inclusion of US$ 45 million in the value of imported car kits:
                            The Commissioner of Customs included the US$ 45 million paid to Skoda as part of the value of the imported car kits, confirming a duty of Rs. 97,15,00,054/- and an equivalent penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962. The petitioner contended that this amount was for technical assistance and not related to the car kits' value. The Tribunal, however, found evidence suggesting that the payment was linked to the car kits, including cost sheets and work-sheets indicating that US$ 1000 per car kit was part of the lumpsum payment.

                            3. Financial hardship and pre-deposit amount:
                            The petitioner argued that the Rs. 30 crores pre-deposit was excessive, especially since Rs. 42 crores had already been recovered during the investigation, and Rs. 11.54 crores had been paid as service tax. The Tribunal noted that the petitioner had significant financial resources, including cash and bank balances of over Rs. 127 crores and sundry debtors of more than Rs. 75 crores. The Tribunal deemed the pre-deposit amount reasonable, given the circumstances.

                            4. Provisional assessment and credit of CVD:
                            The petitioner claimed that Rs. 23.5 crores of the confirmed demand related to provisionally assessed goods, arguing that duty on these goods could not be recovered until assessments were finalized. The Tribunal dismissed this argument, stating that duty could be recovered if goods were cleared by suppressing material facts and undervaluation. The petitioner also argued for credit of CVD amounting to Rs. 38.5 crores, but the Tribunal held that credit could only be taken once duty was paid. The Tribunal found that the US$ 45 million paid to Skoda was part of the car kits' value and had been recovered from customers using different accounting methods.

                            Conclusion:
                            The High Court dismissed the writ petition, finding no merit in the petitioner's arguments. The Tribunal's order directing the pre-deposit of Rs. 30 crores was upheld, with an extension of six weeks for the deposit. The Court concluded that the petitioner's arguments regarding the inclusion of US$ 45 million, financial hardship, provisional assessment, and CVD credit were not convincing.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found