Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
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

        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>High Court Remands Case for Fresh Consideration, Emphasizes Legal Precedents</h1> <h3>Commissioner Of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal Versus Savitri Sales Pvt. Ltd.</h3> Commissioner Of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal Versus Savitri Sales Pvt. Ltd. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Validity of the Tribunal's order in light of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992.2. Authority of the Central Government to regulate the importation of betel nuts.3. Competence of the DGFT to issue notifications restricting importation below the CIF value.4. Applicability of the tariff value fixed by the importer in the context of DGFT notifications.Detailed Analysis:1. Validity of the Tribunal's Order:The appeal questions whether the Tribunal's order is a nullity as it failed to consider the provisions of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992, and relevant notifications fixing the minimum price for importation of betel nuts. The Tribunal had followed a precedent from the case of International Seaport Dredging Ltd. vs. C.C. & S.T., Visakhapatnam, and concluded that betel nuts imported below the minimum price were not prohibited goods, thus setting aside the order of confiscation and associated penalties.2. Authority of the Central Government:The appeal contends that the Tribunal's order undermines the Central Government's authority to regulate imports, potentially harming domestic growers' interests. The judgment references the Division Bench decision in Union of India vs. Navin Kr. Jha, which upheld the Central Government's power to revise minimum import prices under Section 5 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992. The Division Bench emphasized that regulation is essential for planned development and that the DGFT, acting as an arm of the Central Government, has the authority to implement such policies.3. Competence of the DGFT:The appeal also challenges the Tribunal's failure to recognize the DGFT's competence to issue notifications restricting imports below the CIF value. The Supreme Court in Union of India vs. AGRICAS LLP and Others highlighted that the FTDR Act's provisions are supplementary to other laws, empowering the Central Government to regulate imports through notifications. The Court affirmed that such notifications are intra vires and not ultra vires, reinforcing the DGFT's authority.4. Applicability of Tariff Value:The Tribunal's decision was criticized for not appreciating that the tariff value declared by the importer and the duty paid thereunder were overridden by the DGFT's notification fixing the CIF value for betel nuts. The Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Raj Grow Impex LLP and Others underscored the importance of balancing national economic interests and the interests of domestic farmers against importers' personal gains. The Court ruled that improperly imported goods under interim orders should be subject to confiscation to prevent market disruption.Conclusion:The High Court found that the Tribunal did not consider binding legal precedents, including the Division Bench decision in Navin Kr. Jha. The Court remanded the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration, instructing it to take into account the relevant legal positions and decisions cited, and to issue a reasoned and speaking order on merits. Consequently, the substantial questions of law were left unanswered, and the appeal was allowed.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found