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 :

        2019 (4) TMI 1098 - AT - 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

        CESTAT Upholds Decision Against Arshiya Supply Chain in Customs Duty Evasion Case The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT ALLAHABAD upheld all impugned orders and rejected the appeals presented by Arshiya Supply Chain Management Pvt. Ltd. The ...
                        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.

                            CESTAT Upholds Decision Against Arshiya Supply Chain in Customs Duty Evasion Case

                            The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT ALLAHABAD upheld all impugned orders and rejected the appeals presented by Arshiya Supply Chain Management Pvt. Ltd. The appellant was accused of aiding importers in evading the Additional Duty of Customs, also known as SAD, by allowing them to warehouse goods without paying the duty. Despite the appellant's request for adjournment being denied, the Tribunal found no reason to interfere in the impugned orders, emphasizing the appellant's role in facilitating the duty evasion. The Tribunal affirmed the allegations and dismissed the appeals, concluding that the appellant was assisting in the evasion of the Additional Duty of Customs.




                            Issues: Request for Adjournment, Allegations of aiding in evasion of Additional Duty of Customs, Impugned orders

                            The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT ALLAHABAD involved the issue of a request for adjournment by the appellant, who was identified as Arshiya Supply Chain Management Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal noted that the appeals were taken together for decision as the issue involved was the same, although the impugned orders were different. The appellant was accused of aiding various importers in the evasion of Additional Duty of Customs, also known as SAD, leviable under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The Tribunal mentioned that the importers either paid the SAD subsequently or faced demands and penalties. Referring to a previous case involving similar allegations, the Tribunal found no reason to interfere in the impugned orders, as it was established that the appellants were facilitating the evasion of SAD by allowing importers to warehouse goods without payment of the duty. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld all the impugned orders and rejected all the appeals presented by the appellant.

                            In this judgment, the Tribunal addressed the issue of allegations against the appellant regarding aiding importers in the evasion of Additional Duty of Customs. The Tribunal highlighted that the appellant, Arshiya Supply Chain Management Pvt. Ltd., operated a Free Trade Warehousing Zone at Khurja and was accused of facilitating importers in evading the duty. The Tribunal noted that the importers either paid the duty subsequently or faced demands and penalties. By examining the case records and referring to a previous ruling involving similar circumstances, the Tribunal concluded that there was no basis to interfere in the impugned orders. The Tribunal emphasized that the appellant's actions were deemed as assisting in the evasion of SAD, as evidenced by allowing importers to warehouse goods without fulfilling duty obligations. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the impugned orders and rejected the appeals.

                            The judgment also addressed the issue of the appellant's request for adjournment. Despite the appellant's request being rejected, the Tribunal proceeded to hear the learned representative of Revenue, Shri Pawan Kumar Singh, and reviewed the case records. The Tribunal highlighted that the appellants, in this case, were accused of aiding importers in evading the Additional Duty of Customs. By considering the allegations in the show cause notice and the impugned orders, the Tribunal found no grounds to interfere in the impugned orders. The Tribunal cited a previous case to support its decision, emphasizing the appellant's role in allowing importers to evade the duty. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld all the impugned orders and rejected the appeals, thereby dismissing the appellant's request for adjournment and affirming the allegations of aiding in the evasion of Additional Duty of Customs.
                            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