TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Delhi High Court overturns penalties in import license case, citing bonafide belief and equity principles.</h1> <h3>M/s Vaish Brothers Versus CC, New Delhi</h3> M/s Vaish Brothers Versus CC, New Delhi - TMI Issues:1. Application of Section 129A(iii) of the Customs Act, 1962 for dismissing an appeal due to a penalty amount less than rupees two lacs.2. Validity of penalty imposed on the assessee for importing goods against a license issued against fake shipping bills.Analysis:1. The Tribunal initially dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee in limine based on Section 129A(iii) of the Customs Act, 1962, as the penalty amount was below the specified threshold. Subsequently, the matter was remanded to the Tribunal by the Delhi High Court to decide the appeal on merit, leading to a review of the case.2. The case involved the importation of a consignment by the assessee using a transferrable script issued under the 'Focus Product Scheme' authorization by DGFT. The Department alleged that the license was issued against fake shipping bills, resulting in the imposition of a penalty. The Tribunal considered the facts and observed that the appellant had purchased the license from the market, which was issued by DGFT and registered with Customs, with payment made through proper channels. The Tribunal cited precedents indicating that penalties can be waived in cases of bonafide belief without malicious intent. It concluded that the appellant acted vigilantly as a buyer, unaware of the license's authenticity, and that the failure primarily lay with DGFT. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to cancel the penalties based on equity principles and similarities with a prior case involving M/s Sing World.3. Given the identical circumstances and the common license for both consignments, the Tribunal held that the assessee was entitled to relief under the principle of equity before the law. Following the earlier order and rationale, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and dropped the penalty imposed on the assessee, ultimately allowing the appeal in favor of the appellants.
TaxTMI 