TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- 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
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) whether customs duty was payable on MS barrels cleared into the Domestic Tariff Area after import of duty-free inputs packed in those barrels; (ii) whether the assessee was entitled to the benefit of 25% penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962.
Issue (i): whether customs duty was payable on MS barrels cleared into the Domestic Tariff Area after import of duty-free inputs packed in those barrels.
Analysis: The exemption under Notification No. 52/2003-Cus dated 31.03.2003 did not protect the clearance of packing materials into the Domestic Tariff Area where the assessee failed to establish that the MS barrels were incapable of repeated use. In such circumstances, appropriate customs duty was recoverable on their clearance.
Conclusion: Customs duty was payable on the MS barrels cleared into the Domestic Tariff Area, against the assessee.
Issue (ii): whether the assessee was entitled to the benefit of 25% penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962.
Analysis: The penalty under Section 114A was attracted, but the assessee was entitled to the statutory option of paying 25% of the penalty, since that concession had not been extended by the lower authorities. The principle applied was consistent with the Gujarat High Court ruling relied upon by the Tribunal.
Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to the 25% penalty option, in part in its favour.
Final Conclusion: The duty demand was sustained, but the penalty order was modified to extend the benefit of paying 25% of the penalty, resulting in a partly allowed appeal.
TaxTMI 
