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>Customs authority upheld in dismissing appeals over breach of Exemption Notification conditions</h1> <h3>SHESHANK SEA FOODS PVT. LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA</h3> SHESHANK SEA FOODS PVT. LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA - 1996 (88) E.L.T. 626 (SC), 1996 (8) Suppl. SCR 802, 1996 (11) SCC 755, 1996 (8) SCALE 461 Issues:1. Jurisdiction of Customs authorities to conduct search and seizure operations related to imported raw materials under Duty Exemption Scheme.2. Interpretation of Exemption Notification conditions and its violation by the appellants.3. Authority of licensing authority versus Customs authorities to investigate alleged violations.4. Applicability of Section 111(o) of the Customs Act in cases of breach of conditions of import licenses.Analysis:1. The case involved a writ petition filed by a company seeking to prohibit Customs authorities from conducting search and seizure operations on their premises related to imported raw materials under the Duty Exemption Scheme. The Customs authorities alleged that the company violated conditions of an Exemption Notification by selling or disposing of the materials, justifying their actions.2. The Exemption Notification issued under Section 25(1) of the Customs Act specified conditions, including the prohibition on selling or disposing of the exempted materials. The company argued that only the licensing authority had jurisdiction to investigate violations of their advance licenses incorporating the Notification's terms, excluding Customs authorities from such inquiries.3. The company relied on Import and Export Policy provisions and the Hand Book of Procedures, emphasizing that the licensing authority was empowered to investigate cases of material misuse, excluding Customs authorities. However, the Court found no indication in the policies that Customs authorities were barred from investigating breaches or that only the licensing authority had jurisdiction.4. The Court referred to Section 111(o) of the Customs Act, which allows confiscation of goods exempted subject to conditions if the conditions are violated. The Court concluded that the breach of the Exemption Notification conditions, leading to the disposal of materials, empowered Customs authorities to take action under Section 111(o).5. Despite arguments citing the Central Board of Excise and Customs' communication on license condition breaches, the Court held that the breach of Exemption Notification terms, entitling the company to duty exemption, fell under Section 111(o) jurisdiction. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed, upholding Customs authorities' power to investigate and take action in such cases.
TaxTMI 