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.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
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:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    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

        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 ruling: Varied penalties for import discrepancies based on individual roles and involvement</h1> <h3>M/s. Trichur Traders, C.K. Boban, A.R. Ajeesh Versus The Commissioner of Customs</h3> The tribunal found M/s. Trichur Traders liable for penalties due to import process discrepancies but set aside penalties due to lack of direct ... Imposition of penalty - Mis-declaration of imported goods - Smuggling - Whereas the goods were declared as toys, the actual goods were batteries, CFL, ladies inner ware, soap, etc. - appellant have already suffered arrest and served detention for some time under COFEPOSA - Held that:- From the case records, it is seen that M/s. Trichur Traders are the importers and have filed the Bills of Entry. It is on record that discrepancies in the weight and description of the goods in the Bills of Lading and goods actually arrived in the containers is established. He has arranged for the import of the consignment and paid the foreign supplier. It is very difficult to believe that goods for which an order has not been placed and for which payment has not been made would arrive just like that without the active knowledge of the importer. The importer has filed the Bill of Entry under Section 46 of the Customs Act, 1962. The importer has accepted his guilt in the statements given before DRI. As such, the importer cannot hide under the reason that they have simply signed the documents given by the CHA for the purpose of clearance of the cargo. The thrust of appellant argument is that they were not aware of the clandestine/illegal clearance of the goods from the port premises itself without payment of duty. Such an argument would not obviate the fact that they are the importers and as such, they are liable for the discrepancies in the import. Therefore, they have rendered themselves liable to pay penalty. However, penalty cannot be imposed both on the proprietor as well as the firm. The imposition of penalty on Shri C. K. Boban is valid. Penalties imposed on M/s. Trichur Traders are set aside. Penalty on Shri A. R. Ajeesh, working for CHA - Held that:- The incontrovertible evidence has been placed to show the role of Shri A. R. Ajeesh in the modus operandi which was also corroborated by the statements of others and photocopy of container cell permission letter recovered from the premises of CHA. Therefore, the retraction by Shri A. R. Ajeesh does not hold any water - penalties on Shri A. R. Ajeesh are tenable, however, quantum is reduced. Appeal allowed in part. Issues involved:1. Alleged smuggling of imported goods without payment of duty and customs procedures.2. Mis-declaration and illegal clearance of goods.3. Imposition of penalty on appellants.4. Role and liability of the appellants in the illegal activities.5. Consideration of penalty on the basis of involvement and circumstances.Issue 1: Alleged smuggling of imported goods without payment of duty and customs procedures:The case involved allegations against M/s. Trichur Traders for attempting to smuggle imported goods out of Cochin Port without paying duty and not following customs procedures. The goods, declared as toys, were found to be batteries, CFL, ladies inner wear, soap, etc. Investigations led to the issuance of show-cause notices proposing confiscation of goods and penalties on the appellants.Issue 2: Mis-declaration and illegal clearance of goods:DRI registered a case against M/s. Cherry Medicals, Trichur, for mis-declaration and illegal clearance. Shri A. R. Ajeesh was implicated in aiding in the clearance of goods. The cases highlighted mis-declaration of imported items and illegal removal of goods from the port with the involvement of various individuals.Issue 3: Imposition of penalty on appellants:The appellants contested penalties imposed on them, arguing lack of awareness and innocence in the illegal activities. They claimed to be victims of circumstances and not directly involved in duty evasion. The appellants challenged the valuation process and penalties, citing suffering under COFEPOSA detention.Issue 4: Role and liability of the appellants in the illegal activities:M/s. Trichur Traders and Shri C. K. Boban denied direct involvement in the smuggling activities, asserting they were unaware of the clandestine methods used. Shri A. R. Ajeesh, a student, claimed innocence and lack of authorization for port entry, attributing his actions to the influence of others. The tribunal examined the evidence to determine the extent of the appellants' participation in the illegal clearance of goods.Issue 5: Consideration of penalty on the basis of involvement and circumstances:After reviewing the facts and submissions, the tribunal found M/s. Trichur Traders liable for penalties due to discrepancies in import processes. However, the tribunal acknowledged the lack of direct involvement of the importer in the illegal activities, leading to the setting aside of penalties on M/s. Trichur Traders. Penalties on Shri C. K. Boban were deemed valid but subject to reduction. Shri A. R. Ajeesh's role as a CHA worker was established, justifying the penalties imposed on him. Despite some reduction due to the passage of time, the penalties on Shri A. R. Ajeesh were upheld.This detailed analysis of the judgment showcases the tribunal's assessment of the alleged smuggling and mis-declaration, the appellants' arguments, and the final decision on penalty imposition based on individual involvement and circumstances.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found