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
  • 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

        -

        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>Tribunal Overturns Order, Grants Appeal with Emphasis on EPCG Scheme Interpretation</h1> <h3>KUMARAKAM LAKE RESORTS Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, COCHIN</h3> KUMARAKAM LAKE RESORTS Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, COCHIN - 2010 (253) E.L.T. 262 (Tri. - Bang.) Issues Involved:1. Non-compliance with procedural requirements under Notification No. 44/2002-Cus.2. Maintenance of proper accounts for services rendered.3. Registration of imported vehicles as private vehicles.4. Demand for duty after finalization of assessments.5. Invocation of extended period of limitation under Section 28(1) of the Customs Act.6. Imposition of penalty under Section 114A.Detailed Analysis:1. Non-compliance with Procedural Requirements:The appellant argued that the procedural requirement under Condition 4 of Notification No. 44/2002-Cus., dated 19-4-2002, for obtaining a Certificate of Installation from the Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise was not substantive. They relied on the Supreme Court decision in Mangalore Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner, which distinguished between substantive and procedural conditions. The Tribunal agreed that the non-compliance with the procedural requirement did not justify denying the benefit of the exemption notification, especially since the usage of the imported goods for earning foreign exchange was established.2. Maintenance of Proper Accounts:The appellant maintained that proper accounts were kept regarding foreign exchange earnings, which were duly audited and certified by Statutory Auditors. The Tribunal found that the impugned notification did not stipulate the maintenance of separate records for the fulfillment of export obligations. Therefore, the non-maintenance of such records could not be a ground for denying the exemption benefit.3. Registration of Imported Vehicles:The vehicles were registered as private vehicles, but the appellant contended that the requirement for registration as tourist/commercial vehicles was introduced only on 14-6-2006, after the importation of the vehicles in 2002. The Tribunal noted that the vehicles were used for tourist purposes, and the registration as passenger cars prior to the new stipulation could not be a reason for denying the exemption benefit.4. Demand for Duty After Finalization of Assessments:The appellant had fulfilled the export obligation and obtained Export Obligation Discharge Certificates (EODC) from the JDGFT. The Tribunal referenced similar cases where it was held that the demand for duty after the discharge of export obligation was not sustainable. The Tribunal found that once the JDGFT issued EODCs and the Customs authorities finalized the assessments, issuing a Show Cause Notice was not justified.5. Invocation of Extended Period of Limitation:The Tribunal held that the ingredients for invoking the extended period under Section 28(1) of the Customs Act were not present. The issuance of a Show Cause Notice after the finalization of assessments and cancellation of Bonds and Bank Guarantees was deemed improper.6. Imposition of Penalty:Given the above findings, the Tribunal concluded that the imposition of a penalty under Section 114A was not sustainable. The Tribunal emphasized that the violations pointed out by the Revenue were technical and did not warrant such penalties.Conclusion:The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal with consequential relief. The Tribunal emphasized a broader interpretation of the EPCG scheme and procedural compliance, noting that technical violations should not lead to the denial of exemption benefits, especially when the substantive conditions were met.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found