TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
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
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, on payment of duty, interest and penalty by the importer, the deemed conclusion of proceedings under Section 28(6)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 extended to the co-noticee Customs Broker and barred the penalty imposed on it under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962.
Analysis: Section 28(6)(i) deems the proceedings to be conclusive, after full payment of duty, interest and penalty, in respect of the person served with notice and other persons covered by the notice. The Board circular relied upon by the adjudicating authority was read as a clarificatory instruction and not as one capable of overriding the statutory mandate. The exclusion relating to seizure and confiscation was held not to defeat the statutory benefit in a case of duty demand and penalty where the co-noticee was proceeded against on the same notice and on the same set of facts. The denial of the benefit to the Customs Broker, while extending it to the importer and its Managing Director, was found unsustainable.
Conclusion: The deemed conclusion under Section 28(6)(i) applied to the appellant Customs Broker, and the penalty imposed under Section 112(a) could not be sustained.
Final Conclusion: The penalty order against the Customs Broker was set aside and the appeal succeeded.
Ratio Decidendi: A co-noticee covered by a Section 28 notice is entitled to the benefit of deemed conclusion of proceedings under Section 28(6)(i) once duty, interest and penalty are paid in full, and a clarificatory circular cannot curtail that statutory consequence.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
