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
  • 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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
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
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 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
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    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
      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

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        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

        <h1>Tribunal Reduces Import Fines for Photocopier Importers, Aligns with Precedent</h1> <h3>Sai International, Sooraj Graphics, Sagar Enterprises, Rajeshwari Graphix, Aiswarya Enterprises, Impact System Inc Versus CC, Cochin-Cus</h3> Sai International, Sooraj Graphics, Sagar Enterprises, Rajeshwari Graphix, Aiswarya Enterprises, Impact System Inc Versus CC, Cochin-Cus - TMI Issues Involved:1. Imposition of redemption fine and penalty.2. Determination of the percentage of redemption fine and penalty for importers violating the Foreign Trade Policy by importing second-hand photocopiers without a valid license.Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:1. Imposition of Redemption Fine and Penalty:The appellants filed 17 appeals against the orders of the Commissioner of Customs (A) regarding the imposition of redemption fines and penalties on the import of second-hand photocopiers without valid licenses. The primary contention was whether the imposed fines and penalties were excessively high. The appellants argued that the fines and penalties should align with the consistent decisions of various Tribunal Benches and High Courts, which typically imposed fines of 10% and penalties of 5% of the value of the goods.2. Determination of the Percentage of Redemption Fine and Penalty:The Tribunal examined the relevant case laws and precedents. The appellants cited several decisions where the Tribunal and High Courts had consistently reduced the fines and penalties to 10% and 5%, respectively. Key cases referenced included:- Navpad Enterprises vs. CC, Cochin (2009): The Tribunal imposed fines and penalties at 10% and 5%, respectively, which was upheld by the Kerala High Court.- CC, Tuticorin vs. Sri Kamakshi Enterprises (2009): The Madras High Court observed that authorities could impose fines less than the market price of the confiscated goods.- Maa Tara Enterprises vs. CC, Cochin (2009): The Tribunal followed a benchmark of 10% fines and 5% penalties on the value determined by the Chartered Engineer.- Commissioner of Customs, Cochin vs. Dilip Ghelani (2009): The Tribunal maintained the fines and penalties at 10% and 5%, emphasizing consistency in similar cases.- Omex International vs. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi (2015): The Tribunal reiterated the imposition of fines and penalties at 10% and 5%, following the precedent set by previous cases.The Tribunal acknowledged the appellants' argument that there was confusion during the relevant period regarding the importability of second-hand photocopiers. The Supreme Court in Atul Commodities Pvt. Ltd. vs. CC, Cochin (2009) clarified that photocopiers are capital goods and freely importable, resolving conflicting views from different High Courts.The Tribunal also noted that no market enquiry was conducted to determine the margin of profit, which is crucial for setting the quantum of redemption fine. The Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai vs. Mansi Impex (2011) emphasized the need for market price determination in imposing fines.Conclusion:The Tribunal concluded that the consistent judicial precedent supported the imposition of redemption fines and penalties at 10% and 5% of the value of the goods, respectively. The appeals were disposed of by reducing the fines and penalties to these percentages, aligning with the established legal standards and ensuring uniformity in judicial decisions.Order Pronouncement:The order was pronounced in open court on 08/05/2017, affirming the reduction of redemption fines and penalties to 10% and 5% of the value of the goods, respectively.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found