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>Importer wins appeal for exemption benefits under Section 149 amendment despite original self-assessment challenge</h1> <h3>M/s Manik Sadhu Versus Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata</h3> CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal regarding denial of benefit under Notification No.30/2004-CE dated 09.07.2004. The appellant sought amendment of Bills ... Denial of benefit of Notification No.30/2004-CE dated 09.07.2004 - amendment of Bills of Entry under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 - the self-assessment of the Bills of Entry at the time of clearance, not challenged - HELD THAT:- Admittedly, in this case, the appellant has not challenged the Bills of Entry, but they sought amendment under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, which is very much impressed upon the observations made by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of ITC Ltd. [2019 (9) TMI 802 - SUPREME COURT (LB)], wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court held that the assessment order has to be modified under Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962 or any other relied upon provisions of the Act i.e. Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962. Admittedly, the appellant has claimed for modification of assessment under Section 149 of the Act, the same is available to the appellant. Therefore, the appellant is entitled for amendment in the Bills of Entry. The benefit of Notification was admitted by the adjudicating authority, but held that the same cannot be given to the appellant only because of the reason that they have not challenged the assessments of Bills of Entry. The issue has been examined by this Tribunal in the case of Artex Textile Private Limited [2023 (9) TMI 1268 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD], wherein this Tribunal observed that 'the appellant in principle entitle for exemption Notification as the condition of non availment of Cenvat Credit need not to be satisfied by the importer in respect of imported goods. The same has been clarified by the Central Board of Excise and Customs vide Circular No. 1005/12/2015-CX dated 21.07.2015.' Conclusion - The appellants are entitled for the benefit of Notification No.30/2004-CE dated 09.07.2004 for the imports made prior to 17.07.2015. Appeal allowed. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDEREDThe core legal issues considered in this judgment are: Whether the appellant is entitled to amend the Bills of Entry under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, to claim the benefit of Notification No.30/2004-CE dated 09.07.2004. Whether the appellant can claim the benefit of the exemption Notification No.30/2004-CE despite not challenging the self-assessment of the Bills of Entry at the time of clearance. Whether the exemption from Countervailing Duty (CVD) under Notification No.30/2004-CE is applicable to importers even if the conditions of non-availment of Cenvat Credit are not fulfilled.ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS1. Amendment of Bills of Entry under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962Relevant legal framework and precedents: The appellant sought an amendment of the Bills of Entry under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, to avail the benefit of Notification No.30/2004-CE. The adjudicating authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) denied this, citing the Supreme Court decision in ITC Limited Vs. CCEx., which required challenging the assessment order under Section 128 of the Act.Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Court held that the appellant is entitled to amend the Bills of Entry under Section 149, as the notification was available in the statutory book and the appellant had filed a representation accordingly. The Court emphasized that the appellant's failure to challenge the self-assessment at the time of clearance does not preclude them from seeking amendment under Section 149.Key evidence and findings: The appellant did not claim the exemption at the time of clearance but later sought amendment under Section 149. The Court found that the amendment was permissible as per the legal framework.Application of law to facts: The Court applied Section 149 to allow the appellant to amend the Bills of Entry, aligning with the legal precedent that permits such amendments when the relevant notification is part of the statutory framework.Treatment of competing arguments: The Court distinguished the case from the ITC Limited precedent by focusing on the availability of the notification in the statutory book and the procedural aspect of seeking amendment rather than challenging the assessment.Conclusions: The appellant is entitled to amend the Bills of Entry under Section 149 to claim the exemption.2. Entitlement to Exemption under Notification No.30/2004-CERelevant legal framework and precedents: The exemption under Notification No.30/2004-CE provides relief from CVD, contingent upon non-availment of Cenvat Credit. The Tribunal's decision in Artex Textile Private Limited and the Supreme Court's ruling in SRF Ltd. were pivotal.Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Court found that the appellant is entitled to the exemption, as the condition of non-availment of Cenvat Credit does not apply to importers, as clarified by the Central Board of Excise and Customs Circular No.1005/12/2015-CX.Key evidence and findings: The Court referenced the Tribunal's decision in Artex Textile Private Limited, which aligned with the Supreme Court's judgment in SRF Ltd., affirming that the exemption applies to importers without the need to fulfill the Cenvat Credit condition.Application of law to facts: The Court applied the legal principles from the cited judgments and circulars to grant the exemption to the appellant for imports made prior to 17.07.2015.Treatment of competing arguments: The Court addressed the Revenue's reliance on the Madras High Court decision in Prashray Overseas Private Limited by highlighting the binding nature of the Supreme Court's interpretation and the subsequent clarifications from the Central Board of Excise and Customs.Conclusions: The appellant is entitled to the exemption under Notification No.30/2004-CE for the relevant period.SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGSThe Court established the following core principles: The amendment of Bills of Entry under Section 149 is permissible when the relevant notification is part of the statutory framework, even if the self-assessment was not challenged initially. The exemption from CVD under Notification No.30/2004-CE is applicable to importers without the condition of non-availment of Cenvat Credit, as clarified by the Supreme Court and the Central Board of Excise and Customs.Final determinations on each issue: The appellant is entitled to amend the Bills of Entry under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant is entitled to the benefit of Notification No.30/2004-CE for imports made prior to 17.07.2015.The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief, if any. The operative part of the order was pronounced in the open court.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found