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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        1990 (3) TMI 230 - AT - Customs

        📋
        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

        Tribunal rules against time-barred objection, upholds misdeclaration, unauthorized import findings, directs personal penalties. The Tribunal overruled the time-barred applications objection, upheld misdeclaration and unauthorized import findings, and directed the imposition of ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Tribunal rules against time-barred objection, upholds misdeclaration, unauthorized import findings, directs personal penalties.

                            The Tribunal overruled the time-barred applications objection, upheld misdeclaration and unauthorized import findings, and directed the imposition of personal penalties under Section 112 of the Customs Act. The cases were remanded for fresh orders by the Additional Collector to impose personal penalties on the respondents in accordance with the law.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Time-barred applications under Section 129D(4) of the Customs Act, 1962.
                            2. Misdeclaration and unauthorized import of goods.
                            3. Imposition of personal penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962.

                            Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Time-barred Applications under Section 129D(4) of the Customs Act, 1962:
                            The respondents raised a preliminary objection that the applications under Section 129D(4) were time-barred, as the communication from the Board was received by the Additional Collector on 26-11-1985, and the applications were received by the Tribunal on 28-2-1986, beyond the three-month period. However, the learned SDR argued that the applications were first addressed to the Registry of the CEGAT, New Delhi, and received on 15-1-1986, which was within the three-month period. Upon examination, it was found that the applications were indeed sent to the Registry of CEGAT at Delhi in time and later transmitted to the West Regional Bench. Therefore, the objection regarding the time limit was overruled.

                            2. Misdeclaration and Unauthorized Import of Goods:
                            In the case of M/s. Swastik Woollen Mills, a consignment declared as wool waste was found to contain a significant quantity of synthetic material (Acrylic Fibre) upon examination. The import duty on Acrylic Fibre was much higher, resulting in a duty loss of Rs. 2,33,002/-. The Additional Collector confiscated the goods and levied fines but did not impose a personal penalty, citing a lack of evidence to prove mens rea. Similarly, M/s. Kailash Textile Industries imported goods declared as wool waste, which were found to contain synthetic fibre, leading to a duty loss of Rs. 4,39,607/-. The Additional Collector confiscated the goods and levied fines but refrained from imposing a personal penalty for the same reason.

                            3. Imposition of Personal Penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962:
                            The Board directed a review of the Additional Collector's orders, arguing that refraining from imposing personal penalties was "bad in law." The learned SDR contended that the deliberate act of concealing acrylic fibre under wool waste indicated mens rea, warranting a penalty under Section 112. The respondents' counsels argued that the Tribunal lacked the jurisdiction to impose penalties and that the Additional Collector's decision not to impose penalties was a judicious exercise of discretion, considering the lack of evidence of mens rea and the respondents' status as actual users.

                            Upon careful consideration, it was noted that Section 112 uses the term "shall," implying no discretionary element. Once the import was adjudged unauthorized, the imposition of a personal penalty was a logical legal consequence. The Supreme Court's decision in Indo-China Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. v. Jasjit Singh supported this view, emphasizing that penalties must follow statutory violations, with discretion only in the quantum of the penalty, not in its imposition.

                            In conclusion, the Tribunal found that the Additional Collector should have imposed personal penalties under Section 112, given the established unauthorized import and misdeclaration. The appeals were allowed, and the cases were remanded to the Additional Collector of Customs, Bombay, for issuing fresh orders to impose personal penalties on the respondents in accordance with the law, after hearing them.

                            Conclusion:
                            The Tribunal overruled the objection regarding the time-barred applications, upheld the findings of misdeclaration and unauthorized import, and directed the imposition of personal penalties under Section 112 of the Customs Act, remanding the cases for fresh orders by the Additional Collector.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found